Great Performances (TV Series) Jesus Christ Superstar (2000) User Reviews

Generally okay production

[Gislef · 6/10 · 12 April 2001]

An interesting production, with a more "modernized" style (which was deliberate on the producers' and director's part, if you watch the post-tape "making of"). All the musical numbers are there, and that's always the strongest part of any JCS production. Glenn Carter is mostly harmless. Jerome Pradon gives it all, but no one seems able to decide exactly what his character's motivation is. He ranges from sarcastic and demeaning towards Jesus early on, towards a more "tortured" aspect as he is drawn into the betrayal.

Fred Johanson and Renee Castle are probably the strongest consistent performers throughout. Rik Mayall seems weak as Herod, apparently cast here more as a novelty than anything. The Herod scene also demonstrates one of Carter's problems: he seems incapable of reacting here, almost unsure of _how_ he's supposed to be reacting, like Pradon throughout. Carter seems more concerned that he'll be stepped on by the Herod dancers then the fact he's on trial for his life.

The staging is well done. The costuming is somewhat debateable. Okay, they wanted to update for the 21st century, but do we really need Roman guards dressed like Darth Vader and Pharisees dressed like Cenobites from Hellraiser? There's a curious de-emphasis on dancing and choreography: only the Herod piece is really strong here. The "Simon Zealotes" and "Jesus Christ Superstar" numbers are irritatingly static.

None of this really gets in the way of enjoying the core songs and book, however. I'd recommend it if you're a fan of Rice & Webber.

Jesus Tapdancing Christ

[dunmore_ego · 7/10 · 28 November 2005]

Anytime one of us old codgers over 35 is exposed to a re-working of what we consider a "classic", we approach it with trepidation, fearful our fond memories will be sullied by some upstart's new vision. And yet...knowing that curiosity never really killed *anything*, we unbutton our leisure suits and expose ourselves nonetheless...

On this night I was much glad for soaking in this rock-opera which I have grown to know so well that I can pinpoint single substitute lines in newer productions (spare me the pathos, I call it retention skills) - the new "Jesus Christ Superstar" film. (Unlike "Tommy", Pete Townshend's contribution to the pantheon of messiahs in tight trousers, which has suffered ingloriously at the hands of buffoon modernizers, "Superstar" has somehow retained its glorious and gritty mien through the ages.) Directed by Australian Gale Edwards, at Pinewood Studios, London, this "Superstar" rightfully didn't try to fix what ain't broke.

Filmed with the intent to retain its stage-play look, the production was thus filmed on indoor soundstages, with lighting provided by spotlight, cyberlights and par cans, retaining a "rock" bent. The original "Superstar" incensed half its target audience by updating the Judean era to the 1960s flower-child milieu; this production has been updated to an "apocalyptic future" (an ambiguous period, having been postulated no end and still not arrived at - hey, it's 2001, where's my flying car, man?!), insurrect graffiti on walls, sparse iron-barred concrete structures, with nods to Andrew Nichol's "Gattaca" (1997) and Alex Proyas' "Dark City" (1998), designed to appeal to a generation too hip to be into Christ. Until now.

Pandering to pseudo-Orwellian grittiness, Roger Kirk's costume design outfitted the Bad Guys (Roman soldiery) to please the most dedicated leather-fetishist, taking his cues from Keanu in "The Matrix", and Our Man Darth: Black helmets, nightsticks, high leather boots, thick studded belts, ankle-length black capes - a hair's breadth away from the theme of the main float in the last Gay Mardi Gras...

The music was completely re-recorded for this production, with its signature four-piece-band element over the top of an orchestral backing. Not since Deep Purple's "Concerto for Group & Orchestra" (1968) has there been such dynamic symbiosis between two such disparate idioms. Unlike the 70s "Superstar" session musicians, who displayed a fluidity and looseness which was intrinsic to their day, these new wonderboys with electric appendages smeared their bloodshot session-streetsmarts over the audio tracks like the stormtroopers who beat into the apostles like gay Darth Vaders. They bit. They snapped. Ultimately, the shift in era necessitated this tougher rendition of the music - the drum tracks especially gain from Y2000 production techniques - and this vigorous aspect of the new "Superstar" makes up for some of the less-than-exclamatory vocal iniquities.

Glenn Carter, veteran of the 1996 London stage production, where he played Simon (and somehow resembling a composite of all four Gibb brothers) is Jesus, while Jérôme Pradon (who could pass for Quentin Tarantino's stunt double) is Judas.

Ultimately: how did Carter and Pradon, under Edwards' direction, hold up against the 1973 power-trinity of Ted Neeley, Carl Anderson and director Norman Jewison (who produced not the first incarnation of "Superstar", but definitely one of the most revered)? Granted, the upstarts did not outshine the Masters, so much as shine in their own right.

Carter's voice was Roger Daltrey's without the grit. Yardstick of every Savior Wannabe is "Gethsemane". Ever since stratospheric Steve Balsamo in the 1996 London production made it a staple to hold that high G (G6) throughout the 5/8 breakdown, every son-of-a-god vocalist must conquer this Everest to be considered even remotely divine. Carter fell from grace about halfway. Though his highs were excellent, they were not stunning - but then, even Balsamo could not top the sheer grandeur of the Almighty Ted Neeley, whose encephalon-splitting banshee ululations in the 1973 movie were not even topped by Ian Gillan (Deep Purple's wonder-shrieker) on the original 1970 London studio album. Some reviews compare Carter's acting to the block of wood he is ultimately astride, but he displays as much thespianism as required to convey what he needed to, within the confines of a largely sung performance (a furtive look here, a knowing glance there, conveying unspoken volumes).

And Pradon? Opting to emulate the rambunctious Carl Anderson's rocket-sauce vocal acrobatics ("The" Judas of various productions from 1971 to the present, including the '73 movie, alongside Neeley) guaranteed that Pradon's venial vocal sins would be forgiven.

Pontius Pilate (Fred Johansen) was a surprise bit of casting - no petulant Roman procurator, wizened on a diet of figs and sodomy, this powerful baritone was a head taller than Jesus and broader in the shoulders than The Terminator, his muscled breastplate looking for all the world like he was simply wearing a t-shirt over his real muscles. Which kinda spoils the fun - for the dynamic between Jesus and Pilate has always been one of a powerful man in name, meeting a powerful man in spirit.

Though Rik Mayall is a Champion Sneerer, and though King Herod's role calls for just that, struggling Mayall's lack of vocal talent had him valiantly attempting to keep apace with his musical stage veteran compatriots - alas, though he has performed vocals minimally in the past (most notably with his parody band Bad News), one wonders how he was not cast out of the cast within seconds of opening his tuneless mouth.

The title track's visualization was a new concept: staged, as it were, like a media event, Judas bedecked in leather, singing into broadcast cameras, a repeater screen blaring the visuals, boom mikes crowding Jesus' cross-carrying form; updating the scene to reflect what would have transpired had Jesus - as Judas sings - "come today." Fond memories retained. Not the definitive "Superstar", yet sincere enough to uphold a grand tradition - Behold, it is good.

(Movie Maniacs, visit: www.poffysmoviemania.com)

Super Superstar

[kaaber-2 · 8/10 · 14 May 2005]

When I saw the 1973 version of JCS, I felt it made a mistake by removing the show from the stage and putting it in a desert. This 2000 version has made up for that, and has confirmed my feeling. The show definitely works better as a show. However, I must set the score right in reference to the some of the other posters who seem to believe that this 2000 version invents the focus on Judas. Jerome Pradon does a smashing job as an extremely moving Judas - the best I've ever seen although his voice is more expressive than actually beautiful - but Judas IS in fact the main character of JCS, and was so even in the original version, as Mary Magdalen's rival for Jesus' love. And even in the original stage version, we were supposed to sympathize with him. That was how Rice wrote it: the Gospel according to Judas. JCS is Judas' tragedy, not Christ's, and that is the original angle that separates this story from so many others on the same subject. Apart from Pradon's Judas, I found Tony Vincent's Simon Zealotes - his quirky boy band singer turned political maniac was powerful - better than the original version's Larry Marshall. So thumbs up for the 2000 version's setting (a studio), its Judas and its Zealotes. So what do I miss from the dusty old 1973 version? Mainly the singing. I don't believe Carl Anderson's voice or phrasing can be improved, and Ted Neely's "Gethsemane" surpassed top performance. And one more thing: Although I didn't fall for Norman Jewison's many movie gimmicks, even in the 1970s, such as the arrival of the entire cast in a Jesus bus, the nauseating zooms and countless other examples of violation of film aesthetics that so mar productions from that decade, the 1973 version had one masterly cinematic stroke of genius in the montage of crucifixion images that cut into Christ's "Gethsemane" ("Watch me die"). What the 2000 version gets right all the way through is the choice of telling this very personal story of passion mainly through close-ups. The 1973 was to keen on showing us the entire desert in every shot. But that's only my opinion.

'Understand what power is'

[RJC-4 · 12 April 2001]

As a fan of JCS for almost thirty years, I hadn't expected to see as moving, deft, or gorgeous a production -- especially not on film -- as this. Aesthetically, at least, the work seemed locked in its time, as much imprisoned by late 60s guitar music as by the dusty, overwrought 1973 film by Norman Jewison and the various traveling productions that clunkily preserved the era's design fetishes. For the longest time, the best way to approach JCS has been on your stereo. Which is a pity; it's a musical, for chrissakes.

So Gale Edwards' version is a surprise, and a right nice one. She's correct to design and stage this for the post-MTV generation, a decision that pays off hugely in scenes that imagine Caiaphas and his priests as corporate boardroom cutthroats or Simon's beseeching of Jesus to "add a touch of hate at Rome" while the crowd heedlessly and joyously lofts machine guns. If it's flash, it's intelligent flash, keen takes on the themes of revolt and its repercussions. It's witty, too: her Herod doing gay burlesque is the best visualization to date for Webber and Rice's memorable set piece. Some will feel Edwards' gambles in the last quarter of the work - discomfortingly blending bloody realism with the mordantly surreal and the leeringly profane - are reaching, and they are, somewhat, but they don't betray the production. This isn't giddy "Godspell," after all; it's a story about political murder.

The performances by the principles are superb. JCS is really Judas' story, and here Jerome Pradon's skulking, wincing, exasperated Judas is always watchable, and his singing good, although the limits of his range occasionally show. Rene Castle as Magdalene is fine enough to make you forget Yvonne Elliman; her shift between erotic spell and damaged idealism is something to see. Glenn Carter as Jesus, looking something like a youthful Robert Plant and sounding not unlike him, too, conceives his role as a troubled, unsure savior, an interpretation vastly better than those of his many predecessors in the role who relied on know-it-all saintliness (something the play's text doesn't support, anyway). Other standouts: Fred Johanson's stalking fascistic Pilate, and Rik Mayall's hilarious Herod.

Judging from the ongoing appeal of Christianity, the Greatest Story Ever Told doesn't need revitalizing, at least not in the eyes of its adherents, but JCS did. Edwards' many grace notes are perhaps not as important as her best gift to the story: locating it convincingly in a dark and ferocious political world and reminding that the official tolerance for justice, mercy, and charity is no greater two millenia later. Future messiahs, beware.

Wow!

[abner_en · 9/10 · 28 January 2004]

I had heard of Jesus Christ Superstar before from, of all people, an eight-year-old who was an avid fan, but the very title was enough to throw me off. Then, my sister's high school made the very gutsy decision to use it as their spring all-school musical. Her enthusiasm for it caught my interest. I listened to the London Concept soundtrack and loved it, then watched both this movie and the 1973 version. There is absolutely no comparison. As Jesus, Ted Neely (sp?) always seemed to be sleepy or something, except for his breaking up the marketplace in the temple. But Glenn Carter - wow. Not only can he express the torment of a man who knows that he was only born to die ("To conquer death, you only have to die"...who can forget that??), that his very best friends will deny and betray him, and that he might never get recognition for what he is about to do; he can also display such radiant joy that it is impossible not to smile with him. In the "Hosanna" scene, that gorgeous smile of his just shines with heavenly light - until the Israelites suggest that he die for them. His voice is lovely, but the true shining light in this production is Jerome Pradon's Judas Iscariot.

Usually portrayed as a villain, Pradon's Judas is disillusioned, irritated with Jesus for not doing something about his followers' misguided ideas, and torn between civic duty and love for his best friend. Some have described his voice as not up to snuff, but Judas is arguably one of the most complex characters in the history of theater. Consumed by confusion, anger, helplessness, and guilt, whose voice could NOT crack? The Last Supper and the Betrayal always leave me in tears: Judas' last desperate attempt to understand Jesus, his agonized betrayal of him and Jesus' subsequent forgiveness, followed by his realization that he has been tricked into murdering his best friend by a silent God, and his final grasp at control over his own life by hanging himself.

More pluses: Renee Castle's Mary Magdalene is heart-wrenching as she comes to grips with the fact that she loves a man who will never love her back - moreover, that she doesn't want him to. Simon Zealotes, as a gun-toting militant, represents the many people who thought that Jesus had come to Earth to fight a war against the Romans. Pilate is magnificent, if a little over-acted - a man who does not know what to make of Jesus, who seems so small and helpless, but possesses an inner strength and power that frightens Pilate, who was, everyone must remember, an unwilling accomplice in Jesus' death. Rik Mayall's Herod is hilarious, but something in his facial expression sends chills up one's spine - he may be loopy, but he's nobody to mess with. Finally, although I know Annas is not a comedic character, his voice kills me every time. The perfect weasel-y villain next to Caiaphas' almost too deep bass!

Some common complaints by Christians: First, that Jesus is portrayed as too human. I beg everyone to remember that Jesus was human, and that the night of his arrest he prayed so earnestly for God to save his life that he began to sweat blood. Second, that everything is not portrayed as it is in the Bible. If this worries you, please remember that the Gospel was written by other disciples, and even by people who never knew Jesus personally. The point of the play is to see events through Judas' eyes. As we can never know Judas' feelings and thoughts, this is only someone's attempt to understand how the events of the Gospel may have appeared to him. Third, that the Resurrection portrayed in the Bible is not part of the film. Again, remember that this is Judas' story. Judas did not know that Jesus would rise again. All he knew was that Jesus would die, and that is what the movie portrays.

Now for my few complaints. The actor who plays Caiaphas tries so hard to sing contrabass that often he misses notes and rhythms. Jesus' destruction of the marketplace was not as good as it could have been, what with all the TVs everywhere: the one element in which I prefer the 1973 version. Judas' suicide is rather too long drawn out, and almost loses its importance. But these are minor problems. All in all, I would give this movie two huge thumbs up!

Christ You Know I Love This Show

[alkinsey1982 · 10/10 · 15 October 2003]

What a fantastic production this is. The lavish sets are superb, and this is filmed as it should be - a stage production.

My love for JCS began when I first became involved in an amatuer production of the show, (as I write this there is less than two weeks to the production, 28 - 31 October), which compelled me to buy a CD of the show, see a production and finally buy this video.

I wasn't disappointed. Glenn Carter is fantastic in the title role, (how does he get that high?), and Jerome Pradon equals him as Judas. Those of you who criticise his voice should be aware that he plays Judas as it should be done. His passion and increasing torment is communicated in his emotional singing. Watch out for Tony Vincent as Simon Zealotes, Frederick B Owens as Caiaphas, and Fred Johanson as Pontius Pilate, attired in a very effective naziesque uniform, (he overacts a little but overall is great.

As for Rik Mayall. Humourous performance as Herod, but a shame about his voice.

The most memorably performed numbers are, "Simon Zealotes", "Gethsemane", "Trial By Pilate/ 39 Lashes", and of course the title song, "Superstar". My personal favourite song though is, "Could We Start Again Please".

"Crucifixion", and, "John 19:41", are well done, enough to have most viewers in tears.

Strange thing, mystifying if you don't enjoy this show.

I really love this version!

[ivyingreen · 9/10 · 5 August 2009]

Maybe it's because this was the first version I've seen (I've only watched specific songs from the 1973 version to compare) but I love it! I'm Jewish, so I'm not that invested in the story of Jesus and whether it's blaspheme or not, so I can just enjoy it for what it is: A great story with fascinating characters.

I love the modernization of the story- I love the "Simon Zealotes" scene with the machine guns, I love the outfits, I love Herod's cheesy number, I love all of it. I think it's a great idea and makes it more accessible for it's current audience.

I found Carter's Jesus more human and likable than the one from 1973. I love seeing him get angry, happy, tormented, tired...I love seeing his fear in "would you die for me" and the looks he exchanges with Judas throughout the whole thing- it really speaks volumes.

I loved Peter and Mary's "Could we start again" duet, I think their voices are better (and mesh better) than the 1973 version and while I think Simon looked a bit too much like a "boy band", I liked "Simon Zealotes" more than that crazy dancing in 1973 that I wasn't sure if I was amused or scared by. I think Mary over-acted a few scenes, but she's got a gorgeous voice and is very sensual.

Which brings me to Judas. Now I'll admit- Carl in 1973 has a better voice (apparently Jerome Pradon is a Baritone singing Tenor in this) but this Judas has completely won me over. The reactions, acting, emotions- he's so wonderful I completely fell for his Judas. Even when Pradon's singing got a bit too high for him, his acting more than made up for it IMHO. I keep re-watching scenes with him and catching little gestures and expressions- especially in the scenes between him and Jesus. It doesn't hurt that I found him completely hot, mind you!

The Priests were creepy, even if Caiaphas went a bit too low for his own good. Annas I found was extremely creepy and disturbing- so well done! Pilate I found was interesting. Sometimes I had to laugh at his expressions and over-enunciating, but then again, sometimes he moved me- like the tears he had in his eyes in "Pilate's dream".

All and all I highly recommend this, if you come with an open mind. The first time I saw this it was a bit weird, but the second time I started getting obsessed with it.

Stylized, Gritty, Takes Risks, and Different

[IDanceWithFishes · 7/10 · 21 March 2010]

This is a brilliant adaptation in some ways, and a strange one in others. The acting is extremely strong, though not always subtle; but then again, this is STAGE acting, though it takes a while for one to get used to how it translates on screen.

The setting is great. Claustrophobic, dark, imperfect. It gives a real feeling of entrapment and suspense, that works wonder with this more Gothic re-visioning. The visuals are great; themes are explored with complexity and style. And this telling has one thing; buckets and buckets of style. It takes risks, and not all pay off, but do well.

Glenn Carter gives a touching performance as Jesus, portraying the steely quiet of the divine and the hidden passion of his human side in a delightful mix. His voice is good, though squeaky at times, and his decline is heartbreaking.

Reene Castle is sweet, feisty, and sort of helpless as Mary, Jesus's love interest and Judas's rival. Castle fleshes out her tense emotions with a un polished, vocal warmth that is pleasing and fitting to the character. She does a great job, overall.

Judas was, well, bloody fantastic. He is loathsome, relatable, poignant, complex, and crazy with love all at the same time. Jerome's voice does take a lot of getting used to; the strange tonality and rough vocals add, as opposed to take away, from his character, and his deeply felt acting is just wonderful to watch. Even more interesting to observe is his relationship with Jesus that seems to border on the homoerotic; jealous of Mary and frustrated with Jesus's mixed teachings, but the subtext echoes frustration for not acknowledging his feelings. The best scenes are between Judas and Jesus; they crackle with chemistry, tension, and sadness.

Simon is played with youthful, lively zeal, but it does feel a bit generic in voice and portrayal. Pilate gives a surprisingly tortured, touching, pained performance; his vocals are distinctive, being able to convey militant bravado and fragile uncertainty with great flair. Though at times melodramatic, his performance is sublime, and possibly one of my favourites. Herod has great moments, catching a double sided, prickly personality, but at times seems childish and his voice really wasn't up to scratch.

Yeah. This takes risks, and it has its flaws, but is a fresh look at a powerful rock musical, and is worth a watch. Be warned though; this is like Marmite. You ether love it or hate it.

Theatrical Storytelling, Not Cinematic=Awesome

[Ian_Jules · 9/10 · 29 May 2013]

First of all, I really want to say that I'm not in the "let's hate on Jerome Pradon" gang. Pradon has taken some fire for his portrayal of Judas but I really think the vitriol is undeserved in many cases. Pradon's voice and approach are different to the classic Carl Anderson portrayal l but their supposed to be. Give him a chance. In my opinion, Pradon gives a Judas who is conflicted, torn, twisted, pained, and pent up. You really need to watch his performance, and watch it carefully, to get the full effect of his characterization. He doesn't belt it out like Carl Anderson, but the fact that this is musical theatre at least as much as rock doesn't bother me, though it obviously niggles some. Nonetheless on their own, his vocals wouldn't be earth- shattering, although I quite enjoy hearing the hints of French in his enunciation and the soft yet still rock-tinged and sometimes edgy European sound about them, but when you watch him, Pradon is a born actor. He acts every sung line and his physical/visual performance is wonderful.

There's comedy but there's also drama and angst in his performance. He makes Judas human and multi-dimensional. He does tend to wail when singing but nonetheless, The Last Supper is amazing at times in terms of emotional delivery as is the moment of betrayal. The connection between Judas and Jesus in that moment could not have been more effective. Judas ' Death is painful--but it's meant to be. The staging when Judas is alone singing I Don't Know How to Love Him is beautiful-- filled with primal emotion. Judas is splayed on the floor, looking almost like he himself is being crucified at one point. And the staging of Superstar, the title number, is really interesting in this production. It's just a completely different approach to the song and the vocals. That sequence, along with Pradon's version of Damned for All Time/Blood money are phenomenal and it's largely down to Jerome Pradon, who makes the character his own in a totally unique way. Let him not be Carl. He's Jerome. Let this be Jerome's Judas; don't demand that it be Carl's or Murray Head's.

Otherwise, this production of Superstar is eye-catching, visually engrossing, and representative of a complete vision in its staging. Its setting leaps to life with a postmodern production design including broad strokes of distopic imagery.

The back wall is covered in graffiti. Starting with a great close-up of a graphitized "HATE", much of the Overture is spent in close-up shots and pans across the wall, allowing us to really take in the designs. I find this device fascinating. It gives us a powerful sense of this story's setting; the life and times of the characters. The setting in this production carries an environment of heightened reality.

Glenn Carter has a strong voice and is generally solid as Jesus. Other highlights include Fred Johanson's Pilate and Michael Schaeffer's Annas. The former is a striking new characterization, painting Pilate as a weak man in the guise of a strong one, a man who seems to view his role to be as much that of a showman as a governor and who lives in terror of losing the people's support. Annas is remarkable just for being a perfectly detestable villain.

Drawing parallels with sociopolitical dynamics of today, disciples are portrayed as l revolutionaries rebelling against the Roman Empire. In this production, the segment beginning with Hosanna and moving directly into Simon's song perfectly exemplifies why Judas fears the "Jesus movement" is beyond anyone's control and is dangerous.

There's an interesting moment immediately after I Don't Know how to Love him. Pradon's Judas catches Mary about to kiss Jesus, who is asleep. It does show the nastier smug side of this Judas that some people really don't like, but what's interesting to me is that the moment is played entirely with visuals, set to that fantastic piece of Lloyd Webber scoring that leads into Damned for All Time.

Judas, Mary, and Jesus (who awakes on Judas' arrival) express their feelings only through their facial expressions. You can see the wheels turning in characters' heads from moment to moment. The intense lighting on Judas as we see a change come over him is the perfect finishing touch.

This sequence captures what I like most about this production of Superstar, along with its emotional depth and three-dimensional character treatments: through visual abstraction, it paints an intense hyper-reality that represents characters' feelings and actions more than it directly shows them at times. Through its visuals, it is at times akin to visual poetry or a cousin to ballet. In Judas' Death the noose is lowered onto to the stage by unseen hands, presenting itself to him. During Blood Money, Judas crawls from the priests in a futile attempt to escape fate and Jesus later does the same, crawling desperately from the crowd baying for his blood as Pilate gives the death sentence.

This Superstar is visually stunning at times in a way completely different to the equally powerful cinematic rendition. It uses a unique medium of visual storytelling to convey drama in a uniquely compelling way. Watch the final moments, as Jesus' body is placed on the stage. Gradually, the characters depart until only Judas and Mary, the two other key players, are looking on. And Judas fittingly does witness and feel the Crucifixion in this version even though he is dead. Judas and Mary, who have been stretched with tension throughout the story, stand together over Christ's body. This is a portrait of the characters and emotional journey of the play. It is poetry composed by moving people on a live canvas. It is visual and kinesthetic poetry. In short, it is theatre.

The gayest JCS ever!!!

[green-29 · 7/10 · 28 April 2004]

I knew that there are certain revisionists who believe Jesus and his apostles were gay... I didn't realize that Gale Edwards and Nick Morris were among them! The apostles (especially Tony Vincent, Robert Vicencio and Grant Anthony) look just like every cute muscle boy in a tanktop in every gay bar on the planet. I kept expecting them to make out with each other. This production couldn't have been more homoerotic if the late, great Derek Jarman had directed it himself!

The singing and dancing are great, though Jérôme Pradon's voice cracks with emotion a little more often than someone who wants to be a professional singer should allow himself. Glenn Carter's Jesus is too clean-cut for my taste, and his simpering "hurt" look that he puts on every time he sees Judas gets on one's nerves after a while, but all is forgiven when he nails those high notes. Renee Castle's Magdalene is simply perfection... both her singing and her acting are impeccable. Frederick B. Owens and Michael Shaeffer are perfectly paired as Caiaphas and Annas. It's written in the score that they be a low bass and a high tenor respectively, but emphasizing the contrast by casting a big black guy and a little white guy was a stroke of genius. Finally, Rik Mayall's Herod was solid, but not nearly as over the top as I expected from him.

It had its moments, but . . .

[owlman-4 · 4/10 · 18 August 2006]

I am totally blown away by the high ratings and laudatory comments reflected by others for this production. It's like, what movie did you watch? I felt this production was one of the most miscast movies/videos that I've ever seen. The only cast member that evoked even the slightest pathos in me was Mary Magdalene; having said that, her singing talent fell shy.

The Jesus and Judas characters left me totally cold and confused. They really didn't seem to have a clue what their roles were meant to convey. Jesus was lacking in any quality that would ever make me think of him as a "messiah" or even a complex human being. I felt zero warmth emanating from him.

The Judas character, while certainly reflecting significant zeal, left me bewildered as to his real motivation, his commitment, his humanity.

Sometimes updating the original setting to the modern era works, but this production totally failed to carry or convince me of anything. An interesting thought that my wife pointed out was that the scenes near the beginning where Jesus touches his apostles and vice versa left her feeling like there were almost sensual gay sentiments being conveyed, rather than the natural warmth and compassion that were communicated in other "time of Christ" presentations.

I love musical theater and have seen quite a few productions of JCS, including the original Broadway and movie presentations. This production did have a few good moments that I did enjoy, but this was clearly the worst presentation I've ever viewed, including our amateur local productions. Very disappointing!!!

Brilliant, Best musical film adaption yet.

[claireweasley · 10/10 · 13 July 2003]

The 2000 film version of Jesus Christ Superstar not only superceeds the orginal '73 version, but is a thoughtful, powerful and classy presentation of the brilliant musical penned by Andrew Lloyd Webber and Tim Rice.

I first saw this movie several months ago, I was stunned. Based on the Broadway revival, this is essentially a stage play on film and perhaps that is why it keeps some of the "theatre magic". It should seem easy with the fantastic work of ALW and TM behind them but Gale Edwards and her team ought to be commended (actually, I think they were *cough*EMMY*cough*) for the presentation of this show; the lighting, the direction, the costumes, the setting all add, not only a modern and easily accesible feel, but a believable dramatic aspect that makes the story all the more heartbreaking. It is an undeniabley dark and tragic presentation, but this does not take away from it so much as add more power to the story. As Mr Webber says in the extras, this version is the one he always wanted.

It is the actors however, that bring the most to JCS 2000. In particular Jesus and Judas (Played by Glenn Carter and Jerome Pradon respectively) bring an amazing dymnamic to the screen. Carter (after you get past the fact that he looks scarily like a cute crossbreed of Michael Bolton and Fabio) is an impressive Jesus, he adds a vulnerabilty to his character that makes him both intriguing and humanising. Jerome Pradon is even better, his vocals struggle at times, but his portrayal of Judas outweighs this. He is perhaps one of the most pathetic and simeltaneously heartbreaking Judas' ever played. He plays the inner conflict beautfully, and when Jesus and Judas come up against each other their scenes are rivetting and intensily emotional. The Last Supper and the Kiss Of Betrayal in particular is...just amazing...

The supporting cast is brilliant also, Tony Vincent plays an great warmongering Simon Zealotes, and Pilate is given a newer, sadder aspect by the intense looking Fred Johanson. Perhaps the one exception is Renee Castle as Mary Magdelene, who while looks beautiful and sings even more beautifully, brings a touch too much drama to her part to take in.

If you do not like musicals, or you do not think you can tolerate a story that explores the ideas behind the story of Jesus Christ then you wont like this film, if you do however, you are in for a real treat.

Two very enthusiastic thumbs up. ;P

What then to do about Jesus of Nazareth?

[tucostevens54 · 6/10 · 18 September 2019]

First of all, I think this version is much maligned even before people watch it, simply because it is not the original. Because the cast members are not the same as before they are automatically dismissed. So, at least give it a chance. Now then, the production is clearly not so ambitious as its predecessor. I do prefer the change from the hippie style of the Norman Jewison film, but this is a little extreme - black leather and helmets, cast members clinging to gantries. But it didn't distract me too much, and in some areas in worked quite well, I particularly liked the lair of Caiaphas with the television screens picking up the action. So, cast members then. Glenn Carter, while a little stroppy at times, is a lot more expressive than Ted Neeley. Renee Castle as Mary is heart-breaking as Mary, whilst Tony Vincent makes the most of his single scene as the youthful guerilla Simon the Zealot. Also of note are the villains, the deep voiced Caiaphas and his sinister, shrieky sidekick Annas, who resembles Pinhead from the Hellraiser series. Rik Mayall is also a scene stealer as King Herod, his decadent showman a far cry from Josh Mostel's chubby, frizzy haired hippy By contrast Jérôme Pradon's shrieky voice is clearly not fitted to the role of Judas and at times grates on the ears. One of the most notorious critiques however, is Fred Johanson's performance as Pontius Pilate, is shrieks, bellows and goggles his eyes throughout the show, though he shows moments of promise during his "Pilate's Dream" number. Again, a compromise between this version and the 1973 film would probably bring about an excellent adaptation. As it stands, Jesus hasn't quite changed water into wine.

Literally cannot think of a remake that has infuriated me more.

[fedorafreak-1 · 1/10 · 19 June 2009]

I really am stupefied by the amount of people who claim to be 'longtime fans' of the original 1973 performance that actually PREFER this ridiculously terrible movie.

Let's ignore, for a moment, the poor casting decisions that may have been made. Let's ignore the fact that Judas didn't have the voice for Judas, that Jesus didn't have the range for Jesus, and that nearly every attempt made to add vibrato to any character's voice ended up sounding more like a car going over road bumps.

After all, compared to the rest of the movie, that's relatively minor stuff.

Let's start on what they did with the Judas character. In JC '73, Judas is a principled man who loves Jesus as much if not more than the rest of the disciples. He is not a bad man by any stretch. Rather, he is a sort of tragic protagonist. He betrays Jesus in an attempt to save the rest of them: indeed, reading slightly between the lines, it is completely obvious that Jesus intended him to do so. Despite this fact, the guilt of what he'd done caused him to hang himself. In '73, Judas was -a good man-. He was a character that you could love, sympathize with, understand, and pity. In his final song, he descends (dressed as an angel) from heaven.

In 2000, Judas is a leather-jacket wearing jerk that punches women, punches Jesus, licks Mary in the face for no apparent reason but to make her unhappy, and is really just an all- around creep. This makes it all the more strange when he suddenly becomes the conflicted character, because the lines call for it: one almost gets the feeling that he's just pretending to be a principled person so that people won't hate him. You can almost see the look of glee on his face when he finds out that he can cause a stir over the ointment for Jesus' feet. When he wails about "being spattered with innocent blood," one gets the feeling more that he is concerned what history will think of him, than what has happened to Jesus. When he says "to think I admired you, well now I despise you," he MEANS it... and one wonders how far back the "admired" part refers to. Certainly before the show begins, because he seems to despise Jesus the entire play.

Oh, by the way: in his final song in THIS rendition, he is dressed purely in red, amidst lights that resemble flames, surrounded by chorus-girls dressed in red, singing rudely in Jesus' face as he carries his cross. At one point, he stands on TOP of the cross, pinning Jesus to the ground as he sings spitefully at him.

Gee, I wonder what THAT'S supposed to represent.

Just this would have been enough for me to hate the movie: the defense of the actions of Judas Iscariot was one of the things I found the most powerful about JC: S.

However, I'll briefly go over a few more things.

1: Jesus Christ was, to put it politely, a sissy. A complete, total sissy. He does not portray a strong leader. He does not portray a holy figure. He is 100% unadulterated wuss. One might read this as a clever attempt to portray the emo subculture that has developed in these modern times, but I prefer to view it as overblown and ridiculous.

2: The Pharisees, much like what was done with Judas, are portrayed not just as bad men, but evil men.

3: Pilate was written to be a fair and just man that ended up sentencing Jesus to his fate mostly because (a) he understood that Jesus was planning on becoming a martyr, and (b) he was afraid of the mob. Pilate was portrayed in this version as being a bad man... which (similar to various scenes with Judas) made it very awkward when he defended Jesus before the mob.

4: Simon's "You Get The Power And The Glory" scene: what. the. hell. Simon Zealotes is urging Jesus to "add a touch of hate at Rome" to his sermons to incite the mob against the Romans IMMEDIATELY AFTER a giant melee with Roman soldiers. While Simon is trying to convince Jesus to direct the mob to overthrow the Roman oppressors, the mob is already toting machine guns, fresh back at the sermon after kicking some Roman backside. It just makes no SENSE.

I literally could go on for hours and hours about every little thing I hated about this movie. There was not a single voice stronger than the character's counterpart in '73. The acting, far from being "superior" to that in '73, is overblown, unconvincing, and stupid. The characters have been slaughtered. The POINT of the musical has been slaughtered. One of the greatest things about JC: S is how well it portrays the various shades of gray in the characters and events, and JC: S 2000 is purely, wholly black and white.

I cannot comprehend in my wildest dreams how so many people that claim to be long-time fans of this play/movie could POSSIBLY prefer this over the original.

At all.

Were there a 0 star option, I would choose it.

Objective opinion

[razzberryjellybean · 8/10 · 29 November 2005]

Having not seen the 1973 version, I would like to offer some objective opinions. Please forgive me if I did not get the song names right, but I have named them after reoccurring lyrics.

Starting with Jesus. His vocal range is far to small for some of the higher notes, such as the ones in "understand what power is" in which he is very, very flat, but his falsetto is quite good. Also, it is interesting to note that although he has only 4 facial expressions (angry, distraught/frightened, joyful and blank) he manages to convey the emotions of the character very effectively through the timing of said expressions.

Simon: is one of the most aggravating characters I have ever seen. He looks fresh out of an American soap opera, and although he has a good voice and expresses the emotions of the character, I can't help but find his facial expressions rather amusing ("Jesus I am on your side") Judas: my personal highlight of the film. Expertly acted and providing a cynical touch to balance out the terminal perkiness of Simon. He manages to portray both sides of the story, the devoted follower of Jesus, and the almost prophetic and panicked alter-ego.

Pilot: truly wonderful performance. Sensitively acted, he was amazing.

Caiaphas: Fantastic voice. I nearly jumped out of my skin on his first low note. Supported by a fantastic group of actors as the high priests.

Herod: Not as subtle as it could have been.

In general, this is an excellent movie, although it is often melodramatic. If you are to enjoy it to the full, accept that it is a musical and isn't going to be realistic. It makes Jesus real, and does so in a very entertaining way. Combining a well thought out plot with strained lyrics (did you see I waved?), this is one of the best modernized period pieces I've seen.

An overall brilliant piece, with the occasional discrepancy

[Localfreak · 9/10 · 11 November 2005]

This version of Jesus Christ superstar was wonderfully done. It managed to incorporate the use of the camera whilst still retaining it's 'staged production' quality. I wasn't overly impressed with Glen Carter's performance, at some parts in it his performance seemed to be strained and neither was I too struck on the added 'ultra high' and 'ultra low' notes that appeared to have been added (in comparison to the original version) simply to show off his impressive but completely irrelevant and inaccessible vocal range. (e.g. 'Die' in 'Poor Jerusalem' and 'Get out' at 'The Temple' the latter in particular seemed to affect the perceptions of his character in the film- more 'squealing' than 'fury') However saying that some of his scenes were performed admirably. He managed well in his reactions to 'Heaven on their Minds' and the following 'What's the Buzz' and his reactions were well done too for "When I'm Gone" in 'Everything's alright' where he reaches an arm up and sinks backwards at the same time giving the image of one who is, already at this stage,troubled by the knowledge of his impending suffering weighing on his mind.

Jerome Pradon was, without a doubt, the best Judas I have had the good fortune today. He too, had the occasional 'melodramatic' moment but his facial reactions and the passion with which he sung gave his character such depth, even at the times when he was not in a speaking role. (e.g. the reaction 'look' between him and Carter as Simon the Zealot sings, the reaction shots when Jesus is captured and 'questioned' by the mob- his looks at the beginning as Jesus brushes him off)

Without a doubt a brilliant, lively and stage worthy rendition.

Not for me Glenn Carter

[little_lover666 · 30 September 2004]

I adore this musical in general. Having taken part in an amateur school production some twenty odd years ago (eeek!) I have a special place in my heart for the passion of the music and the awesome talent of its creators.

However, Glenn Carter left me cold. Unfortunate that a tremendously 'generous' role can be so robbed of its potential by the wrong casting selection. Jerome Pradon tickled me as Judas Iscariot. In the opening scene i'd wondered if the guy could actually hold a note to save his life, but as the play moved on, i became quite fond of his squeaky wails... and thought his acting ability to be actually quite admirable.

The costume and set design in this (modified for film) version did it for me, truly bringing the meaning of the historical recreation to light in modern times. Though i did chuckle somewhat at the decision to put JC in ancient loin clothes for the crucifixion after purposefully choosing a grungy style for all characters up til that point.

Renee Castle was a little non-committal as Mary Magdalene ("I don't know how to love him" is a gorgeous piece of acoustic artistry and although not anyone with a mediocre voice could pull it off the way she did... for me, Castle lacked the passion and pain necessary to really do it justice), and i would've soooo enjoyed King Harrods fabulous cabaret scene more if Rick Mayall sang some of his lines rather than scratched his way through a rocky verbalisation of what is otherwise usually a 'rockin' in the isles' delight to experience.

Fred Owens as Caiphas 'almost' had it on a couple of occasions, but croaked a little too much to rate as really impressive. But Michael Schaeffer as Annas was superb. As for Tony Vincent in his role of Simon...? Ohhhh. Cute!!! Really.

Still. JCSuperstar is and always will be the best Rock Opera ever made. Timeless and difficult to perform -without- making an impact regardless of how bad it's casted.

Love this musical.

This incredible video version focuses on the relationship between Judas and Jesus.

[Ankh648 · 10/10 · 24 July 2001]

This video production has everything you could want: Visual appeal, great acting and singing, PLOT, and just the right touch of drama. (It IS the chronicle of Jesus' last week among the living, after all!) The songs are performed with passion and skill, as they should be. Glenn Carter plays a wonderful Jesus, although there are parts where I wonder HOW THE HECK he could get his voice that high! Renee Castle does well as Mary Magdalene. She has a lovely voice and her rendition of "I Don't Know How To Love Him" is deeply moving.

At last we come to BY FAR my favorite performer in this show, Jerome Pradon, who plays Judas Iscariot. In my opinion, Judas MAKES THE SHOW. He is a great character, in spite of his being... well, JUDAS. Mr. Pradon's facial expressions are a riot. He manages to look smug, lascivious, innocent, angry and sad all within the first few minutes of the video. He has an incredible voice as well. The very first song, "Heaven On Their Minds" is probably my favorite, although all the songs are so good that it is really hard to pick. He, in my opinion, is perfect for the role of Judas.

As for the lighting and sets, all I can say is GOOD JOB, Gale Edwards! She has a flair for this video stuff. The lighting is wonderful, especially the scene with Judas and the Jewish priests. Everything in this film has a somber quality, and it makes for an unusual and profound visual experience. There are slogans and phrases spraypainted all over the walls (mostly in French) in the opening scene, (I had to rewind several times to read them all) and the actors / actresses wear leather jackets, jeans, vinyl, tank tops, boots and camouflage. This truly is an UPDATED video version!

The only annoying thing in this video was the Jewish priests, especially the bald white guy with the grating voice, although I guess it's possible that they were meant to be annoying. I watched the parts with them for the first few times (I own the video) but now that I have pretty much memorized those parts I fast forward.

All in all I recommend this video just about anyone who likes broadway-type acting and singing, as well as anyone who likes GOOD ACTING. (Just observe Jerome Pradon and Glenn Carter in the "Last Supper" scene and you'll see it in spades.)

Limited by the staging

[blw37 · 6/10 · 17 January 2005]

This direct to video film is a re-staging of Andrew Lloyd-Webber's second great musical. The word "re-staging" is very appropriate here, for the movie is confined to the stage sets and effects. This approach limited the movie impact of some scenes (especially the entry into Jerusalem and Jesus' flogging).

The story is that of Jesus' last days as seen (chiefly) through the eyes of Judas Iscariot and Mary Magdalene. It is also, as other reviews have noted, a secularised version of these days. The musical plays up Jesus' hesitation at Gethsemane to the point of suggesting that he no longer had faith in his mission, and plays down the miraculous. It finishes with the crucifixion rather than the resurrection and shows a crowd hungering for healing but no actual healings.

In contrast to the 1973 movie version, which was set in Biblical Judea, the setting for this film is a modern fascist/totalitarian state with graffiti and machine guns. While this kind of reimagining has been used successfully to keep other familiar stories fresh, the limitations of the stagy production prevented this version from soaring to the level that might have been expected given the strong musical performances.

A video production that surpasses it's own 27 year legacy.

[jefflebowski · 9/10 · 18 April 2001]

It was with some resistance that I allowed myself to view the remake of Jesus Christ Superstar. After watching the 1973 release at least 20 times I was convinced that it could not get any better.

Well, I was wrong.

The 2000 version of Jesus Christ Superstar, under the direction on Gale Edwards and Nick Morris, was a pleasant surprise for even an uncompromising viewer like myself.

I was especially moved by the human element that has been carefully crafted into the video production. The viewer is never in doubt about the feelings that the performers are trying to convey. Anger, peace, sadness and betrayal are brought out in the seemingly effortless gestures and movements of the actors. This element is a welcomed asset of the production that was somewhat lacking in the original version.

Although the score was rigidly adhered to, it was refreshing to watch new faces and voices give renewed meaning to familiar words. Jerome Pradon does an excellent job of portraying Judas Iscariot. His performance opens the eyes of viewers and allows them to see into his soul and feel his pain. The talents of Glenn Carter as Jesus and Renee Castle as Mary Magdalene are quickly apparent as the biblical story unfolds.

I enjoyed the millennium edition of Jesus Christ Superstar, and I sheepishly admit that I may prefer it over the earlier version. For fans of the original production, I would recommend seeing the new release. It may inspire you in ways that you have yet to discover.

Where's Mommy? You have to be kidding!

[joshualieder · 6/10 · 14 April 2001]

Appealing young cast and terrific Judas. I could hear every word of this great score. The actor portraying Caiphas was also a standout!

Now the bad news...much of this update is played like its director had seen RENT too many times. Those of you who enjoy RENT know what I mean I am sure.

Lastly...did I hear correctly? During the much too swift, telescoped, rapidfire (minus a resurrection) crucifixion scene, ..did Jesus roughly ask "Mommy, where are you?". Which translation of the Bible are those words taken from?!!

I caught this on dvd (bought it actually) and when I heard the Director speaking of how accurate her portrayal of Jesus was as he was "blue-eyed with long blond hair" the DVD almost sailed out my 3rd floor window, but I was too bowled over with laughter.

Oh lets not forget the female angels in leatherwear and caps during the title song. An truly twisted sick choice Ms. Director. No doubt you and Andrew Lloyd Weber were amused...this viewer was not!

This is the worst JCS EVER!

[NameRankSerialnumber · 1/10 · 14 June 2005]

First of all, I bought this DVD because I'm a fan of the show, not because of who's in it. I would like to say that this was the biggest waste of $25.00 in my life. Glenn Carter (Jesus) has got to be the worst for the role! He portrays Jesus as an angry wimpy guy. He's also much too feminine for the role. During Gethsemane, I had to hit the mute button. He makes those angry faces that just make you want to puke! A more suitable singer would have been the man that Glenn replaced: Steve Balsamo. Anyone who's heard the 1996 recording, or has had the pleasure of seeing him on stage knows what I'm talking about. You can catch a clip from one of the concerts where he performed at www.stevebalsamo.net/SB-downloads.htm He's much better then Glenn could ever hope to be.

Moving...

[v-lanza · 10/10 · 18 August 2006]

I've never seen such a moving musical. I had already seen the movie with Ted Neely and Carl Anderson, but this show is more intense, more passionate and more exciting too. The majority of people consider Judas as the worst species of traitor, I should suggest them to watch this musical... If Judas hadn't kissed Jesus, now our Catholic History would be very different... But has anyone thought about Judas' sufferings? He betrays because this is his Destiny, the Destiny God assigned him. Jerome Pradon is absolutely wonderful, not only his voice, but also all his gestures and expressions. He made me laugh, he made me move, he made me feel sorrow and pain. He's extraordinary. I love him. And Jesus/Glenn Carter is as fantastic as him. Jesus loved Judas, one of his Twelve Chosen, and he knows that he must betrays, or His Father's will wouldn't be accomplished. But how painful is! Absolutely marvellous.

Many, many flaws, but source material proves indestructible

[Qanqor · 6/10 · 27 September 2009]

I have deeply loved Jesus Christ Superstar for as long as I can remember. For my perspective on the work, see my lengthy review of the original '73 movie. I watched this new version with low expectations, and a bit of trepidation, but felt the need, as a completist, to see it none the less.

Well, it wasn't nearly as bad as I feared. In fact, overall, I'd have to say I enjoyed it. But honestly, not because of any of the "modernizing" worked for me. Mostly I found this production to be highly flawed. But the original music and book was still there, largely intact. Happily, they didn't modernize any of *that*-- no songs were turned into techno or hip-hop or anything like that. So it was still the gloriously wonderful Jesus Christ Superstar I was listening too, and so it was hard not to enjoy it, despite all the films flaws.

Many of the flaws have been covered here thoroughly in other reviews, so I won't revisit the over-acting or some of the weaknesses in the vocals or the muddling of the characterization. Well, I do have to make *one* point about the vocals: what was up with Caiaphas??? The part is supposed to be for a glorious bass, and when this gentleman sang the very low notes, he sounded sublime. Yet every single time he moved into a higher register, his voice suddenly got all scratchy and awful. Every. Single. Time. My early enthusiasm for him was quickly dashed and replaced with a painful disappointment.

But what I want to dwell on was the setting. The sets and the costumes and all. The whole "modernized" setting, complete with modern clothes, modern graffiti, modern technology in evidence. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't think this was necessarily a bad idea per se. But it fit in awkwardly with the book. We're *looking* at a vague, modern, abstract urban totalitarian state-- but the singers are singing about very concrete historic things like Romans and Caesar and crucification. By the time people start talking about Jesus as alleged "King of the Jews", one's reaction is "Jews??? These people we've been watching were supposed to be Jews? Huh?" I think there was a solution to this problem, but the production people couldn't be bothered with thinking it through that far. My suggestion would have been to do an inverse of what they did in the '73 film. In that film, we are given the ancient Judean setting, but a few anachronistic signposts along the way to serve as modern references. Since this film was going with a modern setting, they needed to add more historic signposts along the way, to orient the story. Do *something* to make it at least look like our modern urban setting is still somehow Jerusalem, that the conquered and oppressed people are in fact Jews, that the conquerers are somehow the Roman Empire. I mean, have some Latin in the sets somewhere, have some star-of-David's in the costumes, have the graffiti explicitly put down Caesar, something. Jeez, at a minimum, how about having the bread at the last supper be matzo, like it ought to be! (it was a Passover seder, after all!). Do *something* so that what we're hearing matches what we're seeing!

Finally, a couple criticisms of the music. While the music, overall, was the original wonderful score, with freshly recorded and well done instrumental tracks, I have a couple nits to pick. First, while they included almost all of the extra musical material that the '73 movie added above and beyond the original album, they left out one song, and naturally it's the one I really like: Then We Are Decided. A true pity. Also, many numbers were done at a slightly slower tempo than the original, and I mostly didn't find that to be an improvement. It merely sapped energy. But most damning was a painful proclivity to slow *way* down at the ending of *every* song, in overly dramatic, overly schmaltzy fashion. Doing this once in a while can be OK, but it started to show up in every song, becoming predictable and eventually dreaded and wince-inducing.

But even with all that, I *still* found the thing enjoyable enough that I was glad I watched it. The '73 original is still vastly better, and the original album is still probably the overall best milieu for this work. But Jesus Christ Superstar proved to be indestructible, and still shone through all the mis-handlings.

So.... very very bad

[mOVIemAN56 · 2/10 · 26 February 2007]

I first rented this not expecting to find the original masterpiece that was the 1973 version. This film turned out to be so much less than that. The film follows the same course of songs and storyline that the original and play does but with more modernized versions of each characters. After a half hour I wanted to turn it off but I had to finish watching it. Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger.

The problem with the 2000 remake is that all of the actors and performers are trying way to hard to make JCS an amazing accomplishment. 30 years ago the film was an incredible feat but today it isn't, it is just another film and musical. Every actor is several steps below the original cast member. Glenn Carter is an abysmal Jesus, Fred Johanson makes you wince when watching him try to portray Pilate and Jerome Pradon is a very weak Judas. Tony Vincent as Simon Zealotes was the only actor who I thought fit well into his role.

While the cast fails so does the music brought forth. The songs from the original play and film were classic rock opera pieces. Every song in this version makes you wince with pain. Fred Johanson trying to perform Trial Before Pilate had me on the floor crying from laughter. Every song Glenn Carter performs it sounds like he is a little girl in the midst of a temper tantrum. If you are going to watch this film, watch as an example of what not to do when making a musical.

1/5 Stars