Talk:Dramatic portrayals of Jesus

It is, I think, controversial to label some of these 'Fictional Portrayals'. I guessing that at least Gibson would consider his move a 'factual portrayal'. Same is probably true of 'Jesus of Nazareth'. Maybe they should be removed, maybe a separate section. DJ Clayworth 15:28, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)

All of them are fictionalized to some extent or another. We can't even be sure what Jesus looked like, so any portrayal of Him is going to be a shot in the dark. There are, to be sure, different degrees of fidelity to the Gospel accounts, but even those accounts might be considered fictional by nonbelievers. -- Smerdis of Tlön 15:44, 17 Oct 2003 (UTC)

These are good points, but it seems to me that there should be some distinction between "The Passion of Christ" which sets out to retell the Gospel stories, and "Last Temptation" which even the author would admit is a story based round the character Jesus. DJ Clayworth 18:21, 18 Oct 2003 (UTC)

This gets into some iffy judgment calls, but I've tried to winnow them as best as I can. (What to do with Jesus Christ Superstar?) -- Smerdis of Tlön 15:16, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Jesus of Montreal did not depict Christ. It depicted a present-day Quebecois named Daniel, an actor who portrays Christ in a passion play and ends up metaphorically acting out a number of scenes from Jesus' life in his own. - Montréalais

I'll suggest someone re-title the article 'Dramatic Portrayals of Jesus Christ'; I think this would convey the meaning suitably while not making any judgments about accuracy. I'll revise the text on one of the linked pages, leaving the link intact. MisfitToys 03:15, Apr 17, 2004 (UTC)

WikiProject Jesus

In order to try to work out the relationship between all the various pages and hopefully get some consensus, I have opened a WikiProject to centralize discussion and debate. We've got several "conflicted" pages at the moment, and without centralizing discussion, it's going to get very confusing. Please join the project, if you're interested in the topic, and start discussions on the talk page. (We need to create a to-do list, but I think the current state is too conflicted to decide even that.) Mpolo 10:49, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

Renaming

Should be renamed fictional and dramatic portrayals of Jesus. Novels aren't dramatic. Movies and plays are. Mandel July 7, 2005 00:16 (UTC)

Jesus of Montreal

A recent editor added "Jesus of Montreal (1989)"; does this really belong here? Although there are strong similarities between the life-arcs of the film's protaganist and Jesus, the actual Jesus doesn't make an appearance in this film.

Atlant 13:53, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning the merger with Jesus in Pop culture

I'm against the merge, mostly because I created the Jesus in Pop culture article in order to clarify secular examples of Jesus, and how he's used in cartoons, songs, et cetera. This article seems to be about people who reenacted Jesus in films and plays. They are two different topics.--ikiroid | (talk) 03:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am for the merge. Films, plays, and books, as well as cartoons, songs, etc, can be pop culture as well. By that definition, they belong together. --Copysan 10:55, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then you'd still have to make them two seperate sections, and put it under some article name like "Jesus in Media" or something.--ikiroid | (talk) 15:34, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, maybe the article "Jesus in Pop culture needs to be narrowed down to "Satyrical examples of Jesus in Pop Culture" and this article needs to be "Serious examples of Jesus in Pop culture".--ikiroid | (talk) 15:40, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]