The Nativity Story
How should one judge a film: by what it is or what it is not? Usually the answer is obvious -- you judge a film for itself. But when the film is based in the bible, I think that throws a different light on the question. How close to the biblical story must a film be? To what extent should the message of the film be the same as the message of the scripture on which it is based? That is the quandary I find myself dealing with to review The Nativity Story.
Here is what the film is.
It tells the story of the birth of Jesus in much the same way as Christmas pageants through the ages have told the story. It uses as its primary source the stories found in Matthew and Luke. Although the two stories are quite different, they also have significant similarities so that we know they tell about the same thing, albeit in very different ways. Of course, if you look at those stories, you will see that there isn't near enough material there to fill a feature length film. In my bible, the Matthew account is about one page long; the Luke account is about two and a half pages. Obviously, the filmmakers had to add material.
Their choice for that was to give us a fictionalized story of Joseph and Mary -- what their life was like in
The story, as it is told in the film, is a devotional story that lets us see a story we have heard many times. The additional material (which makes up most of the film) makes the story interesting and engaging. The relationship between Joseph and Mary develops pleasantly allowing Mary's anxiety over the match (arranged by her parents) to shift to respect and admiration for Joseph's goodness. The plight of an unwed mother in that society gives rise to rejection by many of those around, yet Mary and Joseph persevere
Here is what the film is not.
Although the film does include most of the biblical narratives, it should be noted that the proclamation those narratives seek to make is muted in the film. Matthew and Luke each tell the story as they do for a particular purpose. By combining them, as most Christmas pageants do, the stories lose their distinctive messages. For example, the story as told by Luke carries a great deal of political meaning. Luke's portrayal of Jesus birth needs to be seen in direct competition with that of Augustus and, by extension, the other Emperors. There is a bite in Luke's narrative that is not found in the film.
Matthew's account is designed to allow him to quote Hebrew prophets and allude to earlier stories of Israelite heroes. In the film, there are no prophetic voices telling of
These two versions of the birth of Jesus are very rich stories that speak at many different levels. They are not just a story of a distinctive birth. They also have magnificent political and theological messages that are the real reason why Matthew and Luke included these stories in their Gospels. Those deeper levels of understanding the stories are buried by the narrative the film supplies to make the story more interesting. (Does the Gospel account really need to be more interesting?)
So to judge the film for what it is, I'll say that it is a well done version of a Christmas pageant. It will serve well as a film to watch in church or with family to remind ourselves that the real focus of Christians is about more than Santa Claus or angels getting their wings. It will give us a chance to remember the story once more.
To judge the film for what it is not, it fails to give us the most important messages that the biblical stories seek to share. It is not really the story as the bible tells it. It will give us a taste of the story (and a pleasant taste), but it will not feed us the delicious banquet of God's good news.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home