User reviews

I know, I know its supposed to be about Mary, and it does a little bit of that, but it is also very much about how she sees Jesus. She sees him as a man carrying around the weight of the world on his shoulders, and she understands his true message when many miss it. In this way she serves a blank slate that we the audience can become.

She understands Jesus' true meaning behind the words in a way that only those outside of the story can. She as well as Jesus' mother both know that a gristly fate awaits him - just as we do.

I spent some time looking through the reviews, - many of the most negative reviews are arguing that it gets a lot wrong. So I wanted to argue a few of their points:

One reviewer says its wrong because Jesus didn't baptize Mary. The truth is we don't know. John 3:22 says Jesus spent some time baptizing, but then John 4:2 says Jesus wasn't baptizing, it was his disciples, but both of these moments are about Jesus' time in Judea - not Galilee, where Mary was likely baptized. It seems like in larger groups of baptisms, Jesus would have had his disciples share the work, and in a personal moment like baptizing Mary, (who many have suggested was funding these excursions), its likely in my mind that Jesus would have baptized her.

The same reviewer said that this film refutes that she had 7-demons cast out of her by Jesus (Luke 8:2). This is wrong by all accounts of Luke 8 that I can see. The Bible doesn't say Jesus cast the demons out. The Bible says that traveling with him included Mary who had had 7 demons cast out. The film shows her family attempting to cast demons out of her, and then Jesus sees her and says he sees no demons. This seems to fit well within the possibility of scripture.

It bothers me when people use scripture to try to refute or prove things. If you pull just a single line, you're missing the picture. And just because someone can quickly reference scripture, does not make them right.

Several said Jesus should appear in his early thirties. Again, we don't know. He was most likely between 33-36. The only mention in the Bible says he was younger than fifty.

Some people thought nobody looked semitic, but the Levant was one of the big melting pots, and there's not a lot of research on where all the white people were in 33 AD.

I agree they shouldn't have made Peter acting all righteous and jealous as he was in the Book of Thomas. Why must we tear someone down in order to lift another up? Also the trope of Angry Black Man... no thanks. Many called this a politically correct take on Jesus - and I'd argue that for this reason above that this was far from politically correct, and only reinforces bad stereotypes about gender and color.

Still one of my favorite films, hope this is useful for someone.

Taking the most influential, taken apart, retold, sold, fabricated, used, abused and misunderstood man of the last 2018 years is no easy task. Simply because it really involves all of those things. However, I understand that that's the main reason this production happened. It's a story told a million times, and not told well enough.

I have never seen so much effort into telling the story of Jesus in the most accurate way possible. The movie is filled with its historic background. From its pace to its cinematography. To me, that is the effect seen from much research. This team was not worried about pleasing this or that crowd as they were with what they found out and what they interpreted throughout the process. There's a great unity in this work, which is rare to find. This same outlook permeates the whole movie and the cast.

It took guts to make something made so mystical over the years to be something human, possible, close. From being accurate on the cultural influence on everything that Jesus did or talked about to showing the almost zero impact he had on society of the time. To showing the simplicity of the traveling and eating of the group, to showing the big influence a woman had on the story that unfolded.

An outstanding movie that captured the essence of Chistianity. Because of that, there's a big chance of it being forgotten, ignored and misinterpreted, just like the real story and the real characters.

Beautiful acting, I was really moved by a lot of scenes. It probably helped that the lead actors are in love with each other in real life. But the way the producer got this all on tape also needs to be appraised. There will always be watchers that will down grade this movie because they expect a different (historically accurate, for as far as we can ever know) story line, but for me this is a great movie.

Different view on the historical events and figures. More Mary's view, her fascination with Christ which shape her belief system in him. Creates a window for viewers to have a different perspective than the literal meanings some have been taught. Interesting but not for everyone.

Although I hadn't heard much about this film, the fact that Rooney Mara and Joaquin Phoenix were the stars guaranteed an intense experience.

Ignore the negative criticism. This is a thoughtful and powerful retelling of the story of Jesus, seen from the viewpoint of Mary Magdalene. I can't think of another film that gets closer in spirit to what it must have been like to have been one of the original followers of Jesus of Nazareth.

Shot mainly in barren locations, in a way it is like a play where nothing stands between the viewer and the actors as they capture our imaginations with the power of their words.

However, much is also told visually. A great deal depends on the silent communication of Rooney Mara as Mary and Joaquin Phoenix as Jesus. Rooney Mara projects spirituality as she comes to understand what made her leave her family and follow this man. Joaquin Phoenix projects the look and the intensity usually reserved for John the Baptist in more traditional biblical movies.

There are two kinds of films about Jesus. There are the epics, which usually present episodes from the gospels in a fairly straightforward manner. George Steven's "The Greatest Story Ever Told" and Zeffirelli's "Jesus of Nazareth" also included a distracting cast of well-known actors in cameo roles. Like "King of Kings", the epics have reverence built into them, usually starting with The Nativity.

Then there's the other kind, the psychological kind, where the filmmakers attempt to get into the mindset of Jesus and the key characters. But where "The Last Temptation of Christ" sometimes created a negative interpretation, "Mary Magdalene" is less sensational, revealing the inner struggles of both Mary and Jesus with subtlety and credibility.

My only criticism is that the film moves too quickly after the arrest of Jesus. What it does bring home is that Jesus and his followers were possibly seen as a cult of outsiders. Many Jews in Jerusalem, after the temple episode, must have thought them simply troublemakers. It explains why the crowd asked for the release of Barabbas instead of Jesus - an event not shown in the film.

It's easy to nit-pick details in period movies, costumes, ethnicity and even the fact that everyone speaks English, but "Mary Magdalene" rises above all that; it demands your attention. Inspired performances, a literate script, an atmospheric score and considered art direction make this a memorable experience.

I'm very choosy when watching anything, I look for certain directors, writers, producers, actors, etc. and occasionally tend to watch new and different films. I saw this was directed by the same guy who shot Lion, which was an absolutely phenomenal and powerful film. I came across this and gave it a try. Wow, did I believe it was a great direction and a great great story, even if we all don't know the exact truth about Mary Magdalene, to my heart I feel this was very accurate. A cinematic piece, with great acting and a powerful story. Watch it, pay close attention, with no distractions. Watch the story, not the film.

This is like a perfect adult fairytale, honestly made me tear up. The simplistic natural atmosphere and the relatively slow pace with the brilliant performances by Rooney Mara and Joaquin Phoenix make the film very engaging and realistic. It shows Mary Magdalene, Peter and Judas as well as the other followers as normal people with actual motivation and conflicts. The Bible never elaborates on Judas' motivation to give Jesus in to the Romans, but here it feels very understandable. Same with Peter, same with Mary Magdalene. Mary never got much recognition in the books although she is said to be among the first to find Jesus alive, and here in the film we can follow her life and have even more sympathy for her because of her character, her story and her actions. I'm and atheist now, but I used to be a Christian, and I went to reread my favorite stories in the Bible and feel the characters' emotions again, even more so with the help of this film. The best and most beautiful biblical film I know. If anything, it is believable.

Talented Actors, decent script writers, lovely scenery, beautiful music. I thank you, G. Davis to Dare making a movie about things no one saw, and I forgive you, for not making this movie perfect.

Such an important message that harkens to the Gnostic Gospels with Mary Magdalene showing the way that really was Christ's way. The simplicity and sparseness of the look, the formidadle "temple" and all the apostles trying to understand what is really happening and their roles, makes the moviegoer feel the emotions of the time and people. The innocence of Rooney Mara's look with the elder Jesus seeing her child-like faith that goes so deep sets you up to wanting to find what is known of what happened with her after the events we last see. It is very worthwhile to understand what has brought the world so recently (in 2016 of all times) and the church formally acknowledge her as an apostle. Remember where she sat in The Last Supper?

The direction and acting and production design so special - please see it and don't let the negativity of the reviews hold you back.

I REALLY wanted to like this movie. BUT I was so disappointed. Not only was the movie completely scripturally inaccurate, but the plot was so wrong and the casting (with the exception of Rooney Mara) was preposterous.

PLEASE, those of us with faith, are really hungry for good and accurate movies.

Maria Magdalena (2018), directed by Garth Davis, is a quiet, contemplative reimagining of the biblical story of Mary Magdalene, aiming to restore her legacy from centuries of misunderstanding. Far from the traditional portrayal of a "fallen woman," the film presents Mary (played with soulful grace by Rooney Mara) as a spiritual seeker, drawn not by sin or scandal but by a profound desire for truth and connection with the divine.

Set in Judea during the final years of Jesus' life, Mary leaves behind her family and a life of quiet repression to follow Jesus of Nazareth (played by a gentle and deeply human Joaquin Phoenix). She becomes one of his most devoted disciples - not a passive observer, but a woman of thought and faith, deeply engaged in his teachings about compassion, forgiveness, and the kingdom of God.

The film focuses on intimate moments rather than grand miracles, offering a humanistic portrait of Jesus' mission and Mary's personal transformation. The dynamic between Mara and Phoenix is meditative and restrained - not romantic, but deeply emotional and spiritual. Chiwetel Ejiofor as Peter adds subtle tension, showing the early cracks in what would later become the church's power structure, particularly in how it viewed women.

Maria Magdalena is not a fast-paced biblical epic - it's a slow, poetic meditation on faith, gender, and inner awakening. The score by Jóhann Jóhannsson and Hildur Guðnadóttir adds a haunting layer of transcendence, while the cinematography captures the dusty beauty of the ancient world.

Though some may find its pacing too deliberate, Maria Magdalena is a quiet act of reclamation - giving voice to a woman long silenced by history and inviting viewers to see not just who Mary was, but what she believed, and why it still matters.

Review written by artist jayakumar jrain.

I am very touched as a Muslim. Very close to the profile of Prophet Muhammad. And salute to the clean Mary Magdalene.

The movie tells the story from angles I've never thought of before and incited so much intellectual/spiritual/emotional thought that I'm grateful for. The exact historical timeline is smudged and truncated for cinematic purposes, and the friendships and relationships of the characters/biblical figures are interpreted from thoughtful speculation, but the message and point are beautiful and I appreciated this interpretation so much. I loved the actors portrayals.

After seeing the reviews on this site I didn't have high expectations of this film. However it turned out to be an unexpectedly fine creation. The film captured the earthiness and ardour of every day life in first century Palestine. The scenery was hauntingly beautiful and although was clearly not filmed on location, it had that rocky and trackless quality that undoubtably existed at that time.

The film follows the events leading up to holy week from the perspective of Mary Magdalen. As such, it adopts a moderately feminist theological position. However, this was sensitively done and never came across as a campaigning piece of filmmaking.

The film skilfully explored the way in which the male disciples appeared to misunderstand what Jesus was about, thinking that He wish to establish a new kingdom through armed force. The script then imaginatively portrays Mary is bringing her feminist perspective to bear in understanding that Jesus wish to bring in a totally new way of ordering society based on peace.

The special effects in the film was really excellent. Especially the way that first Century Jerusalem was recreated. CG I has really come on leaps and bounds since the days of the blockbuster film Titanic.

There were a few grating anachronisms in the film. For example, Peter in the final scene refers to the church.

But all in all, this is an excellent film. It's a Real pity that it is currently only showing in three London cinemas. Presumably the large cinema chains think that in the secular age people wont to be interested In a film with a religious thing.

Just listen to the words of Jesus in this movie : "How does it feel to carry that hate in your heart? Does it lessen as the months go by? It seeps into your days and nights until it consumes everything you ones were... But you MUST FORGIVE, there is no other way to enter the Kingdom of God ". Perfect cast, talented script writers, I love this film. And I forgive Garth Davis for not making this movie perfect.

The Movie is almost Perfect to me. I expected more "action" from Mary and richer story line. But actors are Brilliant, Landscape is very beautiful, Lovely music. This is New and very Interesting Story, even Judas betrayal receives New "additional" meaning. In my opinion, Mary Magdalene is the best movie about Jesus and His Apostles so far.

6/10 - to this movie that depicts one of the pillar of the early christianity and as the Vatican named her in 2016 "Apostle of apostles", this movie tries to stick near to the modern historical views of Mary away from the full list of false condemnationans that were thrown unto her, also worth mentioning Jouaquin Phoenex played the role of Jesus beautifully depicting the human side of jesus very well.

-" and she asked him, what will it be like? The kingdom?"

-" and he said, it's like a seed, a single grain of mustard seed which a women took and sowed in her garden, and it grew and it grew, and the birds of the air made nests in its branches"

This film shows a portrait of Mary of Magdala, an extraordinary and brave woman in a time when men determined women's fate and everything had to be done according to the law given by "God". It takes the 2016 view of Pope Francis that Mary was the apostel of the apostels. She understood Jesus spiritual vision in contrary to some of the apostels who were conflicted. If you want to see a dramatic or visual old fasion bible film, you will not like it but I found it respectful to the bible and true to core Christianity without "new age" embellishment. I felt a few profound moments due to the beauty of silence and words unpretentiously spoken. I actually wished they skipped dramatised music in a few scenes. These would have been more powerful without it. I loved the costume design with "homespun" fabrics, mending stitches and simple embroidery. It made me again realize that Mary lived in a time when people made their own fabrics and clothes. There is one point I found regrettable. This story gives the impression, they only know each other a few weeks. I would like to believe that it was longer, even though time does not need to determine a spiritual connection. In simplicity you find truth and "in silence you find god".

Well crafted effort to portray the 13th Apostle. The face of Christ reminded me of Rembrandt's great portrait.

This movie is better then "Passion of the Christ", because there is No Much Blood and Hate in it and actors speak "modern" language. Perfect Cast, Beautiful Scenery, Amazing Music, Talented Director. In my opinion, script writers could put a bit more effort to make this movie perfect.

I was scrolling through Netflix and only intended to watch the first few scenes, but it kept getting better and better! The acting, scenery and music were great in every scene and carry this movie on their own without one needing to have any interest in early Christianity.

It seems like everyone either loves or hates this one, a sure sign that the writers/film maker are creative and brave. The characters have personality (I especially liked Judas' character arc) and the story leaves room spiritual sensitivity; Jesus is at one point talking to women (Samaritans?) at the community well who question the value of forgiveness in a world where men have absolute physical power over you. And if you were wondering how Jesus' message of love and forgiveness was turned into churches full of sexism and violence, this movie has your back. Being interested in the Gnostic Gospels, I also enjoyed the subtle reference to the Gospel of Mary Magdalene.

The elements of this movie work together with rarely seen balance. Our characters move out of familiar and pastoral forms of patriarchy towards imperial institutional forms; the cinematography moves out of austere (but beautiful) Southern Italian landscape into the awesomely imposing walled city state of Jerusalem; the analog synth begins to replace the strings in the soundtrack. It is all done with subtlety, and because of that it is effective. As audience members, we know that Rome will eventually take Jesus' message of love and transform it beyond recognition. It is kind of like the prequel to a horror movie. But the simple truth of humanity and humility cuts through and leaves you with hope.