In The Last Temptation of Christ, the movie shows the vulnerability and humanness of Jesus, the temptations and struggles he dealt with during his ministry, and the writer’s vision of a final temptation offered to Jesus as he hung on the cross. Author Nikos Kazantzakis (1883 – 1957) was a Greek writer and philosopher. He did not become well known globally until the 1964 release of the film Zorba the Greek, based on his novel of the same title. Kazantzakis was always full of wanderlust and spiritual restlessness. He was greatly influenced by Nietzsche, especially as regards to atheism and the superman concept. He was also, however, deeply troubled by spiritual concerns, even entering a monastery for six months. His work in The Last Temptation of Christ reflects Kazantzakis’ struggle with spirituality in his own heart and mind, whereas he tries to reconcile Jesus the man with Jesus the Messiah. To this end he gives Jesus all the desires and temptations and doubts of a man, with the selfless sacrifice expected of a Messiah. Director Martin Scorsese is well known for his portrayal of the Roman Catholic concepts of guilt and redemption. His choice of settings and rich supplemental characters bring a more historically accurate sense of the time period to the movie than the candy-coated films of previous decades.

            Throughout the movie Jesus is shown to be a very troubled and conflicted man who finally realizes his calling to be the Messiah. For most of the movie he actually appears to be borderline insane, with voices in his head, visions, seizures, and headaches. Apparently, this is God trying to get through to him and he is having a hard time getting the message! Part of the conflict he feels is from satanic forces, so he must purify himself by going to the desert. After this trip he fully realizes who he is and why he is here. He is now able to perform miracles and proceeds to do so, including the famous restoring sight to a blind man and raising Lazarus from the dead. This is a rather curious notion to me since he is teaching his followers that when you die, you go to be with the heavenly father. Lazarus apparently didn’t go anywhere. Lazarus is later murdered to “erase” the evidence of the miracle. This is one example of the poetic license taken in this movie to make a point. There is no historical or biblical reference to Lazarus being murdered after his resurrection. I feel the writer uses situations like this to explain why there was not more historical “proof” of the acts Jesus performed – that the opposition tried to erase or undo his actions to lessen their impact on the people and convince them they were just stories.

            When Jesus comes out of the desert he is filled with love for everyone and everything. He is teaching the people this “peaceful resistance” which reminds me of Gandhi and hints of the possible influence of Hinduism and/or Jainism. These religions pre-dated Christianity by thousands of years and you can see their elements in the depictions of the practices and worship rituals of the people in the movie, such as the chanting and idols. An example of his lesson in peaceful resistance is given when he stands between Mary Magdalene and the townspeople who are stoning her, chastising them that only God has the right to judge this woman.

            After John the Baptist was executed, Jesus changed his stance from love and peace to one of active resistance against the hypocrisy and oppression of the Pharisees and Sadducees – even to the point of brandishing a weapon and encouraging his followers to do the same. He speaks of “baptism by fire” and at one point he leads a small army of followers into the temple to make a stand, but then abandons them to be slaughtered when he fails to receive further instructions from God. Although there are four separate references to clearing the money changers from the temple in the bible, there is no reference to the followers being slaughtered while Jesus and Judas fled. I think the writer must have been trying to convey that Jesus was, or at least believed he was, operating on instructions directly from God and not out of personal religious zealotry.

            In the movie, other important religious figures of the time were quick to “recognize” who Jesus “really is” – that being the Messiah – even before Jesus recognizes or accepts this fact himself. There has been a lot of scholarly debate that says it was others who proclaimed Jesus as the Christ or Messiah, not Jesus himself. The movie appears to use these numerous pronouncements from others as part of the “convincing” Jesus to take on his destined role.

            From the beginning of the movie, Judas is portrayed as the right hand man of Jesus and sort of his moral compass. Judas warns Jesus that if he gets out of line, he will kill him. Jesus shares with Judas his vision of the crucifixion and the part Judas will play in it. Judas seems to fulfill his role rather easily, possibly due to his disenchantment with how things are progressing. Much of this movie seems to take place from Judas’ viewpoint, and he is portrayed as a very strong, central figure to the unfolding story. There are historical aspects that support this viewpoint, but it is hotly debated by biblical scholars.

            Small episodes of attention to detail, such as Jesus reading from right to left, aide to the feel of historical accuracy in the film’s depiction of the time in which the story takes place. There are, however, many non-historical aspects and episodes of poetic license in this film. In the beginning Jesus is shown as a builder of crosses for crucifixions. Historically, this is not accurate since a carpenter would not do this type of work. The movie uses this to develop a sense of guilt in Jesus’ psyche for his part in the pain and suffering of others, which can only be healed by his suffering the same fate. A very controversial episode in the film is when Jesus reaches into his own chest and pulls out his heart to present to his disciples. Again, not historically accurate, but representative of his giving all his heart (love) to others – “Take my heart. God is inside me.”  Another controversial scene is Jesus dancing at the wedding. This cannot be proven historically one way or another. We do know that Jesus attended the wedding and many functions, so the argument can be made that Jesus enjoyed these functions and was a pleasure to have in attendance. Since there was no definite ban on dancing, it is extremely likely that this is a fairly accurate depiction of the “human” side of Jesus enjoying himself. Even the turning of the water into wine was given a playful, fun slant – not verifiable, but absolutely possible. Jesus watching the roomful of men take their turn with Mary Magdalene is definitely not to be found in the bible or historical reference. Why Jesus would sit inside and watch instead of waiting outside to talk to her is a big question. Perhaps we are again being shown the human desire which he then denied himself. I am once again reminded of Gandhi and his numerous self-temptations. I did find the vague reference to some past relationship, although platonic, very interesting. That Jesus is there to ask her forgiveness before he can go to purify himself in the desert re-enforces some implied past relationship. In reality, it is a bunch of references to “a woman” in the bible, and a bunch of references to a “Mary”, which have coalesced into the romanticized version of Mary Magdalene as a prostitute, rescued and forgiven, and a loving woman follower of Jesus.

            The pain and suffering Jesus experiences during the crucifixion leads to a dream-like state in which he is given a last temptation - to be taken away from all of this suffering and to become a normal mortal man, marry his heart’s desire Mary Magdalene, raise a family, and live happily. That is, until he sees the slaughter of “his” people by the Romans and realizes that his sacrifice is a necessity for the liberation of the people and the saving of their souls. He then renounces this “gift” of a normal life and asks to be returned to the cross to complete his mission. The movie ends with his death on the cross. This “last temptation” is a very powerful statement which highlights the sacrificial nature of Jesus’ crucifixion as opposed to it being just a severe punishment imposed on him by the current ruling class. It also shows his final act of selflessness, when he chooses mankind’s future over his own happiness. Although brief, I think this is one of the most important statements in the film. I find it interesting that the decision was made to end the film on his death, leaving the resurrection as an open and maybe even irrelevant question. The sacrifice stands on its own merit whether or not there was a resurrection. And the temptation delves to the heart of most religious beliefs – that it is not the needs or desires of the individual that is important, but the greater truth of the spirit.