User reviews

I had been impressed by this on first viewing (despite its being in French only), watched on another Good Friday several years ago; a second look (and the benefit of English subtitles) only reinforces its inherent quality. This is an absorbing, original, savage, funny, and frequently stunning piece of work - although, in view of its subject matter, it does have the occasional heavy-going passage. In fact, Jesus OF MONTREAL was expected to emerge victorious at that year's Academy Awards as the Best Foreign Language Film: facing stiff competition from the likes of CAMILLE CLAUDEL (1988) and CINEMA PARADISO (1989), the honor was eventually bestowed on the latter - a nostalgia piece with child interest, it was an altogether safer bet (though I've yet to catch the film in its entirety myself!)...

Despite their over-familiarity, the 'Passion Play' sequences are quite powerful - thanks also to excellent performances all around. Lothaire Bluteau is quietly impressive in the demanding central role (of an actor who eventually goes mad from playing Christ!); incidentally, he followed this with another spiritual film - BLACK ROBE (1991). Arcand seems to be one of the most interesting auteurs around, as the only other film of his that I've watched - THE BARBARIAN INVASIONS (2004; which did win him an Oscar) - is also superb (apart from being equally thought-provoking and controversial). Speaking of which, I find Jesus OF MONTREAL to be superior to that other notorious Christ-movie of the day - Martin Scorsese's THE LAST TEMPTATION OF Christ (1988)...

Made 30 years ago, 'Jesus of Montreal' is one of those films upon which time seems to have passed without a trace. The movie was created by director Denys Arcand and it is likely that the recent launching on-screens of his 'The Fall of the American Empire' has led to the re-screening of some of his older films at our local cinematheque. The original theme and the interesting structure of his 1989 film shows that Arcand is one of those directors consistent with the art and messages of his films, pursuing quality and waiting to gather enough material, substance and emotion before involving himself into a new project. In the three decades that have passed since 'Jesus of Montreal' was made, the Quebec film maker directed less than ten movies, but each one is special, is worth seeing and invites debates.

The enacting of the Passion is part of the Christian tradition in many places around the world. It is a story about faith and love, about suffering and redomption, which lends itself well to theatrical performances, and 'Jesus of Montreal' is built around such a performance in Montreal in 1989. The modern city is always in the background. Invited by the local priest, a team of actors and its director enter, with talent and passion, in the roles of the New Testament drama, creating an event that resonates in the souls of the spectators. The well-documented and modern vision created by the director, brings to the hills that dominate the city the old story with its historical and human truth, however, the show starts to disturb despite or perhaps due to success. The church authorities consider it too daring, the show-business world is trying to turn it into a source of profit, and during this time the actors begin to pay the price of their passion for theater and of their spiritual involvement in the enacting of the story in the Bible.

The religious and artistic messages of the film reach the viewers. The script is cleverly written, the characters are alive on the screen, drawn from a few replicas each, but still real and expressive. The film talks about the passion for the art of theater and about the state of faith in the corrupt and mercantile world of the late 20th century. Faith lives on, but Jesus can die many times in many ways and salvation is possible in multiple forms. Denys Arcand builds his film by sprinkling it with symbols from the Passion, both through scenes inspired by the Biblical parables but also through expressive visual elements. The team of actors does a wonderful job, especially Lothaire Bluteau in the lead role. 'Jesus of Montreal' is a film that induces emotion and engages its viewers.

I found the first half of this movie to be not very interesting and sometimes extremely slow. But the movie picks up in the second half. The story is then more inspiring and some remarks are causes for deep thoughts.

There's a lot of irony in the second half. One of them brings Daniel (Jesus, played by Lothaire Bluteau) to Ste-Marthe hospital. No one will take care of him there and he has to be brought to the Montréal Jewish Hospital to get some care!

Interesting to hear what Father Leclerc has to say about his life as a priest and how, if he quits his job, he will have nothing remaining.

It seems every actors in Québec had a role in this one. Cameos inlude: Marc Messier (Les Boys), Roy Dupuis (Being at Home with Claude), Denis Bouchard (Les Matins infidèles), Jean-Louis Millette (Bouscotte) and more.

Out of 100, I gave it 74.

A robust, inventive parallel to the life of Christ. This film seems to display utter commitment and genuine integrity. It is moving without being sentimental, and tells its tale with rigour and without too many contrived plot developments. The performances are splendid. You don't have to be religious to appreciate this one, since it stands up in its own right, even if the parallels are ignored. Deserves to be better known.

What if Jesus had been born in the year 1970 instead of year 1, and as unheralded now as He was then- how would our society have dealt with Him?

And if people can get possessed by the Devil, can a regular guy -- not a nut or a fraud -- become gradually and genuinely possessed by Jesus?

Denys Arcand answers both questions in clever and entertaining fashion. With actual events, people, words and thoughts from Jesus' life being transposed to our modern times. Of course a movie like this is aimed at people who don't turn both their brain cells off as they enter the movie house, and won't be happy with 90 minutes of gunshots, car chases, or Jesus being whipped.

And yet this highly hypothetical parable still comes off as a plausible dramatic tale, with the usual Arcand mix of tragedy and comedy. You could have never heard of Jesus and still enjoy this movie.

The cinematography is gorgeous and the main actors are uniformly excellent. Some of the minor characters bother me intensely, which they are meant to do -- they're just too darn good at it.

The script and direction are nicely conventional - in the sense that at no time does the viewer wonder who that guy is or what the heck is going on. Jarring "artsy" cuts, unannounced flashbacks and weird camera angles are many critics' cup of tea but not mine, and thankfully, not Arcand's either.

There is quite a bit of tension-relieving slapstick in this story; some viewers may like it- it *is* funny, but it makes me uncomfortable at times. And the ending is a bit of an anticlimax, although at the second viewing I think I began to see the light.

I originally rated this movie 8/10, but after seeing it again I got more in tune with it and also noticed a few very clever details, so I'm upping it to 9/10. Maybe 10/10 when I see it next.

"Jesus of Montreal" is one of my two favorite films...it's tough for me to decide on one or the other (the other is "With Honors"), but it's one or two. This film has meant so much to me over the years, with its simple, powerful messages of artistic freedom, personal redemption, perseverance during a personal quest...and how heartbreaking the world, and reality, can be.

The male lead has a beautiful Zen-like quality about him during this film...meaning the character as well as the actor. I'd love to see more of his work.

I can only watch this movie once in a while, as it moves me to tears too easily. It's very funny in places, too.

Actor Daniel (Lothaire Bluteau) is asked by Catholic Church represent Father Leclerc (Gilles Pelletier) to update the tired passion play he has put on for 30 years. Maintaining the story but adding more recent discoveries about Christ and the times he lived in, the play is a huge critical and commercial success, but falls foul of the Church, as the new version is considered too radical. With the play in danger of being cancelled, the cast and particular Daniel's lives start taking on elements of the passion play story.

Bizarre, touching, occasionally witty and always absorbing, this is a compelling look at the passion play story, nicely shifted from classic play into real life, which is ultimately quite sad but equally uplifting. A few good swipes at the snobbery and superficiality of the world of art / theatre as well as the Catholic Church who here seem to need to resist change to look after themselves as individuals rather than just the souls they purport to protect. A fascinating, unique insight into the classic story- even the presentation of the new play which takes up a large chunk of the film seems spot on and well presented.

A group of actors put on an unorthodox, but acclaimed Passion Play which incites the opposition of the Catholic Church while the actors' lives themselves begin to mirror the Passion itself.

I imagine what makes this movie so appreciated is its parallels between the Bible stories and the lives of the actors. And, indeed, this is interesting and surely required some clever writing and whatnot.

But what made it enjoyable for me was the exploration of the controversy. Who was the real Jesus? Who was his father? Did he have a beard? What do we really know about him? Without being blasphemous, I think the film touched on some important points, because what we generally believe may not be the same as what the record reveals.

During the first half of this movie I was trying to figure out if it was a not-so-subtle spoof of Christianity, or an outright sacrilege. As I got angrier and angrier at what was going on in the film, a sudden chill went down my back as I realized I was thinking just like the Catholic church sponsors in the movie, AND just like the Pharisees and Sadducees of Jesus' time. I was trying to fit Christ into my own expectations, and I was just as guilty as Jesus' opponents and killers. Tears welled up in my eyes as I realized that Jesus of Montreal was trying to depict in a very real way exactly what went on in Jesus of Nazareth's time. This is not a movie for the faint of heart. People bleed, they are naked, and they die. But just as Jesus of Montreal died for his followers and his neighbors, so did Jesus of Nazareth.

An intellectual, unique (this may be the only time you'll ever see someone arrested while on the cross), multi-layered film which touches on a wide variety of subjects, from the meaning of faith to the commercialism of everything and from solidarity of friends / actors to hospital bureaucracy. Oh, it is also about the beginning and the end of the universe. It's not the most exciting film from a moviemaking standpoint, but it does provoke thought - and has some very funny moments, to boot (wait 'till you see the "Kabuki" rendition of the play). Ironically, for a film that takes a supposedly irreverent approach to the story of Jesus, it contains some religious sequences (the miracles and the resurrection) more powerful than in any "traditional" Biblical epic. *** out of 4.

Daniel Coulombe is recruited by Father LeClerc to jazz up the traditional Passion play (a dramatic representation of the events leading to the passion and Crucifixion of Jesus) staged in Montreal's Catholic Sanctuary. Coulombe, in turn, gathers a group of actors/apostles, ranging from unemployed actor Remy (now overdubbing dialogue on porn movies) to ambitious commercial actress Mireille. Together, they workshop a controversial and moving Passion play which leaves audiences awestruck and the priests reeling, as the production challenges the dogma and hipocrisy of the Catholic church.

Director Denys Arcand weaves a remarkably deep tale which comments on commercialism, selling out, spirituality, theological scholarship, fidelity, loyalty and more- but in a manner that is relatively subtle and humorous, so the film never feels didactic. The somewhat magical effects of the theatre come across beautifully; in fact, "Jesus Of Montreal" is a must for anyone involved with the Theatre. For those interested in film trivia, you'll notice that there are veiled biblical/mythical references throughout the film, (Magdalen lobster, the Lawyer as Satan, The Charon restaurant), and that the director appears as a judge when Daniel is on trial. The story itself is well constructed, and its somber denouement drives home the suggestion that resistance and a revolutionary viewpoint are liable to bring ill fortune...

You don't have to be Catholic- or even 'religious' - to enjoy "Jesus Of Montreal": this is a film for anyone who has ever contemplated the difference between spirituality and religion, or who has had to make a decision between doing what the system demanded and doing what they believe is the honest thing to do.

A priest in a large Catholic church in Montreal thinks the church's annual passion play is getting stale and needs updating. He hires Daniel, an actor, to accomplish this task. Daniel takes his assignment seriously, thinking and studying and putting together a cast of talented actors. The quest for the cast is quite humorous - one actor is dubbing an adult movie, another is appearing in a perfume ad (where she is seen walking on water), and so forth. The actors indeed come up with a play that has the play's audience moving from location to location for the performance of each station.

The passion play performed in this movie gave me a better appreciation and understanding of the power and significance of the Jesus myth than anything I have ever read or seen. As a lifelong atheist I can say it is wonderful. Lothaire Bluteau gives a powerful (even passionate?) performance as Jesus.

I was uncertain where "Jesus of Montreal" was going after the performance of the passion play. But that is where things really got interesting. Performing the play has had a marked effect on the cast and Daniel's life starts to take on certain aspects of the life of Christ. Director/writer Denys Arcand is clever in the way he presents the parallels.

Daniel is tempted by a publicist who tells him he can make him rich and famous and details some of the techniques. One suggestion is that Daniel write a book, and when Daniel says he doesn't have anything to say the publicist retorts, "Some ways of saying nothing go over so well. Think of Ronald Reagan." And there are plenty of writers who could write the book and, at the least, Daniel could publish a cookbook, since they always sell.

There is a parallel to Christ's running the moneychangers out of the temple, healing the sick, and even the crucifixion. The play is too avant-garde for the Church and they try to shut it down - refusing to desist Daniel is arrested in the middle of the play while he is on the cross. The movie is filled with such pointed commentary.

In passing Arcand touches on the deficiencies of the Canadian health care system (an emergency patient is told to take number forty-eight and wait in line), a topic that he would expand on in "The Barbarian Invasions." As a subtle commentary in the context of the story, Saint Mark's Hospital is seen as hopelessly chaotic whereas the Jewish hospital is shown as professional and efficient.

As Daniel and his troupe of actors take on more and more of a modern day version of Jesus and his disciples the question arises as to what the reaction would be to Jesus in our modern society. The answer seems to be that he would be regarded as a nut case except by the few who knew him closely and identified with his message.

Arcand's talents as a director are not to be underestimated. The staging of the passion play is beautifully done and some of the camera angles used in the church scenes are very creative. As in other Arcand films he uses music by Francois Dompierre mixed with some classical compositions (in this case Pergolesi) to great effect.

I came to this movie after having seen and enjoyed Arcand's "The Decline of the American Empire" and "The Barbarian Invasions." After now having seen "Jesus of Montreal," I think I can say I am an Arcand fan.

This is a clever, humorous, satiric, and absorbing film.

Yes I have seen, the classics, Citizen Kane, Casablanca, Gone with the Wind. Yes I know about Scorcese, Coppolla, and the rest.

But this is my favourite film of all time. It is heartwarming, passionate, funny, spiritual, uplifting, and all encompassing that it lifts your soul no matter who you are. It is universal. I don't think I will ever find another movie that will beat this and I have seen many good... no ... GREAT films..

And of course it is Canadian (and so Am I) and that is a plus.

Asked to helm a stage play about the life of Jesus Christ that would appeal to modern audiences, a Montreal stage actor sparks controversy when his play proves a success due to its blasphemous nature in this Canadian drama. While there are some amusing moments early on (especially as he sets about recruiting actors who dub adult films), the movie is rather slow to warm up with the juice of the material only really emerging in the film's second half. That said, 'Jesus of Montreal' is encapsulating at its best as the protagonist becomes more and more like Christ while rehearsing (and playing) the role and as the Church figures start to show their real colours with their sponsoring of his show; "not everyone can afford psychoanalysis, so they come here" bluntly states one such official at a pivotal point. There is also much to like in how innovative the play is, with audience members literally walking around as the cast members change location, and there is a fun irony in how the play captures larger audiences than anything else ever sponsored by the Catholic Church, though for what they believe to be the wrong reasons. Some elements of the film may be a little over-the-top, such as an angry fit during an advert audition; one's mileage may also vary depending on one's familiarity with the biblical elements paralleled here, but this is generally solid stuff.

"Jésus de Montréal" is probably the best film of Denys Arcand who also made "Le déclin de l'empire américain".

Unfortunately this film had a less big commercial success than "Le déclin de l'empire américain", but it was made with a biggest budget. Even though, it is an accessible film for almost everybody (the Quebequers may be advantaged because it was filmed in Quebec).

I highly recommend this film especially for the Quebequers and all other Canadians.

Vincent Leclair

I remember watching this as a younger kid and it didn't make much sense. I'm watching it again as an adult and it's way different.

In "Jesus of Montreal" a church yearly performs a passion play about the life of Jesus. The play has become somewhat outdated and the Father of the church asks a director to modernize the play.

This director Daniel (Lothaire Bluteau) does that modernization very radically and after a lot of study. He casts some actors with a commercial background and plays the leading role of Jesus himelf. The audience is enthusiastic, the church and the authorities not so much.

In my opinion the theme of the film is not a religious one. The message that the institute church has drifted away too much from the message of his founding disciple is everything but original.

The theme of the film is much more about artistic integrity. The actors believe in their work of art and don't want to give in to outside criticism and pressure. Remember their role in a controverial passion play might damage their career in well payed commercials.

Other reviewers might select another theme. That of a lead character identifying himself so much with his character that he nearly becomes this character. Indeed when the film progresses Daniel takes on some Jesus like characteristics.

It is a question of personal interpretation which of the two themes you find dominating c.q. Most important. I choose for the first one.

Denys Arcand "Jesus of Montreal-1989" is a movie from a director with intelligence & refined sensibilities. (His best-known work is "The Decline of American Civilization. He also made The Barbarian Invasions a film which I enjoyed very much It won best foreign film Oscar 2004) Plot: A group of actors putting on an interpretive Passion Play in Montreal begin to experience a meshing of their characters & their private lives as the production takes form against the growing opposition of the Catholic church. They begin to experience a meshing of their characters & their private lives as the production takes form against the growing opposition of the Catholic Church. (Lothaire Bluteau), the actor who plays Christ, discovers that his own life is taking on some of the aspects of Christ's. By the end of the film we have arrived at a crucifixion scene that actually plays as drama & not simply as something that has been forced into the script. It suggests that most establishments, & especially the church, would be rocked to their foundations by the practical application of the maxims of Christ. The film gives us simple, powerful messages of artistic freedom, personal redemption, perseverance during a personal quest...& how heartbreaking the world, & reality, can be. The film manages to make deft, original swipes at a plethora of modern 'evils': media hype, advertising, hospital bureaucracy, & of course the hypocrisy of the religious establishment. Cinematically the film is visually elegant & an uncluttered sort of movie. In a sense, "Jesus of Montreal" is a movie about the theater, not about religion. But in the end their challenging production becomes the toast of the city, the Roman Catholic Church strongly objects to its Biblical interpretation & forcefully stops the performances. At least this film does not become overly heavy-handed on screen. This film was nominated for the 1989 Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film but did not win. 4 Stars Recommended~!

"Jesus of Montreal" is a beautiful film about the real meaning of spirituality. Pitted against the inflexibility of religious institutions, Daniel (played wonderfully by Lothaire Bluteau) shows his rag-tag disciples the real meaning behind the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. The story-within-the-story works well. Director Denys Arcand subtly begins to blend the story of the biblical Jesus with the day-to-day lives of a group of actors performing in a play about the last days of Jesus. The turning over of the tables in the Temple, the temptation of Jesus overlooking the city of Jerusalem, being abandoned by the male disciples, and many other tales of Jesus find their parallel in the lives of Daniel and his friends. The resurrection scene at the end of the film is a particularly moving overlapping of the two stories. In the hands of a lesser writer/director, this could have all been really trite. Instead, the film becomes in the truest sense of the term a parable in which we see how great truths from a great teacher really do apply in our own lives. Every performance is pitch perfect, the pace is just right, and the message is, as always, what we all need to remember: Real happiness lies not in what we have but in what we give. A ten out of ten film.