Paul, Apostle of Christ

Only God knows how this happens when they are in our time, honest brave men, shooting a historical film about the Christians. To unfortunately, Christianity to still faces of persecution. This film is about the follower of the Lord Jesus Christ — the Holy Apostle Paul. In Orthodoxy and Catholicism Paul as Peter — two of the most revered Apostle called the chief Holy Apostles for a particularly zealous service to the Lord and to spread the faith of Christ.

This film tells about the last period of life of the Apostle Paul, who was at first a persecutor of Christians, a heathen. But once he experienced imagine the power of the Lord, heard Him a reproach and then Saul (Paul) was blind for three days until it is not healed by the Christian Ananias, and then Saul was baptized and in baptism received the new name — Paolo a Ripa d'arno.

The viewer will get to watch interesting version of the last days of the life of the Apostle Paul, presented a young and talented Director Andrew Hyatt. Similar movies to shoot very hard, not all possible, but this movie was quite decent.

Good to remind that is the Apostle Paul, Christians believe the Apostle of love, who said on her wonderful words:

"The first message to Corinthians Saint Apostle Pavel"

CHAPTER 13.

1 if I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and love is not have, I — have become sounding brass or a sounding cymbal".

In the film it is impossible not to mention decent acting James Caviezel (the Evangelist Luke), Olivier Martinez (Mauritius), James Faulkner (the Apostle Paul), Joanne Whalley (Priscilla) and others. All the actors are chosen perfectly and play perfectly.

Laudable talented lighting and camera work, makeup, hair, costumes, great selection and skillful use of music, soft and clear sound. I also want to thank our Russian doubles to unfortunately, the remaining unknown.

I recommend the movie to everyone, even atheists, and, of course, — Christians.

10 of 10

Oh, and it is difficult to make a film on the Bible without a clear religious connotation. Here why many Christian biographies are, to be honest, not a very exciting picture. The films, in the basis of which lies the Holy book, are, as a rule, a literal agitation, and look at coming from the screen is piety in one and a half hours — task of light. If the old Testament is still possible to adapt spectacularly (see "Noah" and the recent failed "Samson"), it seems to be about the New Testament the movie is already said all possible.

The history of Apostle Paul — material, which perfectly suited for film adaptation. A terrible persecutor of Christians is transformed into the influential leader of the people he once tormented and killed. To unfortunately, only a small part of the thrilling history of the individual is transferred to "Paul, the Apostle of Christ." The script of "Paul" follows the current trend of biographical projects and the action here focuses on episode of the life of the subject. Alas, it is on my opinion, the case where a similar technique achieves the effect.

It is no coincidence that the film borrows stylistic devices of the many other religious projects like wide-angle shooting and disembodied voices over the frame. And still "Paul" should be in mostly a linear narrative, starting with the arrival in Rome of St. Luke the Evangelist in as a Roman guard kept Paul in prison. Ironic that takes the role of Luke James Caviezel, who played Jesus in the Passion. At least Caviezel plays and his present enhances the film, especially the than other characters, which only frown and looming somewhere in the background.

"Paul" was removed mainly to Malta as the scenery has convincingly built the ancient world. In General, Paul succeeds in recreating the tangible fear for an entire group of people. However, on the background of the issues of life and death unfolding in the time of persecution of Christians, the actions of some characters is questionable. Have in mind that many of the decisions are frankly... a movie that destroy the illusion. As this is not only Paul, but and flock: from many actions naturally wants to roll his eyes. Obviously, such techniques should play for entertainment, but it desire is destroying the small logic that there is history.

The main reason of indignation after watching "Paul" can be that the picture is devoted "" " all who were persecuted for faith", although none of the film does not evidence tolerance religions. Even if you omit the artistic exaggeration and questionable reliability of the source, that still "Paul" is not enough drama. Adding fuel to the fire of discontent and the fact that the script Luke could intentionally or unintentionally distorted the martyrdom of Paul to give it person worth. In other words, the Director Andrew Hyatt invented a completely new interpretation of the drama to give the film a memorable climax, but has generated only confusion from view.

Trying to create a deep story, which covers the bloody religious persecution, specifically this biblical drama seemed to have given up and from your character, and, in the end, from its main theme. Strictly speaking, a character whose name is listed in the title, becomes a supporting character whose the backstory of the killer of Christians, and especially is not affected. No religious or human, if so can be expressed, and reasons for changing its Outlook is not considers that actually reduces the value of the film as such. With the point of view of cinematography, of course, is the effort, i.e., acting, design and costumes are made pretty well, but rethinking this difficult biblical stories are clearly not have enough understanding of the subject.

5 from 10