“KING OF KINGS”

Southland Times, Issue 20497, 28 May 1928, Page 8

“KING OF KINGS”

A GREAT PICTURE PORTRAYAL OF THE LIFE OF CHRIST POWERFUL PREACHING The Municipal Theatre was packed to the doors on Saturday night when the long looked for Cecil B. de Mille production, “The King of Kings” made its first public appearance in Invercargill. The moving picture world has in its time made some daring ventures, but it has never attempted anything half so bold as this production. It is the story of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, reconstructed from the Gospel narratives. Many people, even outside the religious* world, will be inclined to cry “hands off!” The pictures have developed a characteristic touch, and when they have attempted sacred subjects they usually have failed i& reverence and true insight. “David, th* Shepherd King” was a great and spectacular production, but religiously and historically it was a screaming farce. But the most devout follower of Jesus Christ need fear nothing in the “King ot Kings.” From beginning to end the work is earned through with fine reverence and restraint. There is not a jarring note. It was a sound instinct that excluded at the outset the usual tiresome list upon list of producers, directors, photographers, actors, and so on, and commenced directly with a quiet restrained paragraph in perfect taste. It may be said at once that the picture makes free enough with the Gospel narratives. No attempt is made to preserve the strict sequence of either incident or text. Opening with a somewhat hectic, yet possibly true enough portrayal of Mary, the courtesan of Magdala, the picture proceeds to build itself up from a selected series of incidents from the Gospels. Much is necessarily omitted. It is noticeable that sentences are freely culled from places quite unrelated in the sacred text, and joined together to give added clearness or force to an incident. There is no historical basis for the linking of Judas with Mary Mag dalene, any more than there is for the part played by the boy, Mark. But these, after all, are small matters. Too much can be made of strict chronology, and there is a place for the imagination, provided it is reverently used.

The one touch of downright extravagance is the scene of the rending of the rockii towards the end. But the presentation taken as a whole gives a living picture as full of reality as it is of human pathos and appeal. If the picture be taken as a whole, one can say that the human life of our Lord and His disciples must have been not unlike that. The characterization is very powerful. Simon, Peter, Judas, the boy Mark, Mary the mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene, Caiaphos and Pilate, all will leave a permanent impression on the mind. Of the Supreme Figure, that of the Master Himself, the best comment, perhaps, is that the rendering is always in perfect taste, and one to which no one can take exception. There are a number of human touches introduced, which, if unhistorical, are the highest art, full of suggestion and quite unforgettable. Who that has seen the picture will ever forget the little blind girl, groping darkly till she finds Jesus ana receives her sight; or the Master mending the broken leg of a child’s doll, while the little mite eagerly waits; or the dog belonging to the thief on the cross which tracks his master to the final scene, and, joyfully greeting him, lies down at the foot of the cross to wait for him; or that other scene of the two mothers at the cross, where the mother of the crucified thief comes to Mary and .says, “That one is my boy?” Pure imagination, perhaps, but very true to life. After all, the Gospels arg fragments. The whole is not told, and many an unrecorded incident such as these may well have happened. And they make the sublime story live, and help to bring its appeal home. Altogether the screen has never done anything finer and it was not suspected that it could do anything half so fine. It is powerful preaching, and many a man anct woman who never goes inside a church will be deeply moved, and made better men and women as they follow with the eye the progress of the sublimest story of all time. A TORRENT OF ABUSE. BAPTIST MINISTER’S DENUNCIATION. “EXTREMELY BLASPHEMOUS.” In alluding to the picturization of the life of Christ which in the film, “The King of Kings,is at present being shown in Invercargill, the Rev. J. Carlisle delivered a scathing denunciation of the picture during the course of the service at the Baptist Church last evening. To write to the newspaper advising people to attend the screening of such a picture was in his opinion, a terrible thing. It seemed almost incredible that such a picture should be allowed to be made. When he received an invitation to attend a private showing of “The King of Kings” he refused most emphatically. He urged the members of his congregation not to attend the screening of a film which he characterized as extremely blasphemous. The records of the Hollywood film stars who took part in the picture were, he said, far from honourable. How, then, dared they attempt to portray the life of the Lord Jesus Christ? For what reason did they picturize such a subject ? Merely for their own ends, to amass a fortune by commercializing the life of Christ. And in doing so, they had produced what he considered to be the most sacrilegious and blasphemous film he had ever heard of. No words he said, were strong enough to condemn that infamous picture and he concluded by exhorting all present to avoid seeing it.

In the course of his sermon which was entitled “Exposing the Biggest Liar in Invercargill,” the Rev. J. Carlisle stated that during the week he had heard of many wild guesses as to whom he was going to expose. In continuing he explained that it was the devil who was ever present amongst the people of Invercargill. The city needed cleansing and he prayed that it would be cleansed thoroughly. The devil was abroad with his lies turning sturdy young men into hardened criminals. Mr Carlisle urged everyone to resist the insidious onslaughts of the devil and to live a pure life in accordance with the Scriptures. The world was pleasure mad, he stated, always seeking pleasure and never being satisfied when it obtained it. At the recent Jtfay Fair, everyone went mad. With what results? Out of the 15,000 people who, according to the newspapers, were present in the streets on the opening day, could one be found who was entirely satisfied with the proceedings? He then referred to other pleasures such as pictures, theatres and dances. In speaking of the last-mentioned he said that a friend of his had been informed by a dancing instructor that 50 per cent, of the people went to dances for immoral pur poses. When he was young, he attended dances but he subsequently realized that spiritual happiness was the main thing' in life.