Casting Jesus: Did he really look like Brad Pitt?
NEW YORK — They say you can never be too rich or too thin. Surely, it goes without saying you can’t be too good looking, either, right?
Especially in Hollywood.
But in the popular new film “Son of God,” Jesus is so, well, easy on the eyes some are revisiting an age-old question that has vexed scholars for centuries:
Did Jesus really look like Brad Pitt, only slightly better?
OK, that exact question hasn’t vexed scholars for centuries. But those who study religion as portrayed in popular culture do note depicting Jesus on the screen has always been a tricky business, one that balances weighty theological concerns — how divine to make the son of God, and how human? —with more earthly ones, such as how best to sell movie tickets?
“Listen, films are big business,” said Steven Kraftchick, professor at Emory University’s Candler School of Theology. “They’re probably not going to cast Jonah Hill as Jesus.”
Not that Hill wouldn’t provide an interesting spin. But the producers of “Son of God,” Roma Downey (who also plays Jesus’ mother, Mary) and her husband, Mark Burnett, were clearly going for something different when they chose the strapping, 6-foot 3-inch Diogo Morgado, a Portuguese actor who’s dabbled in modeling, for “The Bible,” their History Channel miniseries. (“Son of God” is culled from footage shot for the series).
Downey won’t deny her Jesus is good looking — not that she’d get very far with that — but explained she was seeking a subtle mix of qualities.
“Someone with strength, presence, charisma, tenderness, kindness, compassion and natural humility,” she said. “Someone who could be both a lion and a lamb.”
Casting came down to the wire. A few weeks before shooting was to begin in Morocco, there was still no Jesus. Downey fired off an email to church and business contacts with the urgent header: “Looking for Jesus.”
Salvation came from an unexpected place.
In Ouarzazate, Morocco, a member of an advance team remembered an actor who’d been there more than a year earlier on a different project. He searched through hotel registries and found the name.
Not surprisingly, Morgado’s looks have been a big part of the conversation ever since.
“We not only found Jesus, we found ‘Hot Jesus,’” Oprah Winfrey told him in a TV interview, referring to a Twitter hashtag about the actor.
“A hunkier Jesus than necessary,” Variety noted in its review of the movie. The Hollywood Reporter called it “Jesus as pretty boy,” and noted a resemblance between Morgado and the young Marlon Brando.
But the box office is booming. “Son of God” came in a close second last weekend to Liam Neeson’s “Non-Stop,” beating out the blockbuster “Lego” movie.
To Morgado, it’s all good.
“Long after I’m gone, this is going to be my legacy,” he said in a telephone interview. “So, why should I worry about people calling me ‘Hot Jesus’? I’m really proud of this movie.”
His key acting challenge, Morgado noted, was getting that balance between divine and human: “It’s a really tricky thing.”
That’s always been a problem, said Jeffrey Mahan, professor at the Iliff school of theology in Denver.
“Jesus films go back to the very beginning of cinema, and there’s always that tension between human and divine,” he said.
Mahan noted “this isn’t the first sexy Jesus on film.” When Jeffrey Hunter played the role in the 1961 “King of Kings,” he said, people dismissively dubbed it “I Was a Teenage Jesus,” a reference to Hunter’s youthful good looks (though he was in his 30s).
Some films, such as the 1959 “Ben-Hur,” avoided problems by not showing Jesus’ face. Others, said Adele Reinhartz, author of “Jesus in Hollywood” and professor at the University of Ottawa, show a sanitized figure “that could have walked right out of a Renaissance painting.” But they were always fairly good looking.
“These are marketing decisions,” Reinhartz said.
The deeper problem with portraying Jesus, Reinhartz added, is “to make a compelling movie character, you need flaws. And that doesn’t fit into most conceptions of Jesus.”
One exception was Martin Scorsese’s 1988 “The Last Temptation of Christ,” starring Willem Dafoe as a Jesus conflicted about his identity and experiencing earthly temptations, such as lust. That didn’t please everyone — a Christian fundamentalist group hurled Molotov cocktails at a Paris theater where it played.
Then, there was Mel Gibson’s 2004 “The Passion of the Christ,” starring Jim Caviezel, an enormous hit deemed one of the most controversial films of all time because of its bloody depiction of the Crucifixion — Roger Ebert called it the most violent film he’d ever seen — and allegations of anti-Semitism.
Rules for posting comments
Comments posted below are from readers. In no way do they represent the view of Oahu Publishing Inc. or this newspaper. This is a public forum.
Comments may be monitored for inappropriate content but the newspaper is under no obligation to do so. Comment posters are solely responsible under the Communications Decency Act for comments posted on this Web site. Oahu Publishing Inc. is not liable for messages from third parties.
IP and email addresses of persons who post are not treated as confidential records and will be disclosed in response to valid legal process.
Do not post:
- Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
- Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
- Copyrighted materials of any sort without the express permission of the copyright holder.
- Personal attacks, insults or threats.
- The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
- Comments unrelated to the story.
If you believe that a commenter has not followed these guidelines, please click the FLAG icon below the comment.