The film is a modern retelling of the story of Paul the Apostle and takes liberties with history and the Biblical account. In this installment Paul (Andrew Roth) is never called Saul. Stephen Marti (Stephen the Martyr) doesn't give any speech before his death. You can make the connections as Annan (Tim Roth) is Ananias, Barny (Torry Martin) is Barnabas, and Priscilla (Vanessa Ore ) is Priscilla oddly enough.
Rome actually had trials. I was confused why modern society needed salt mines to create a New World Order, which is why they were after Peter because he had the map. The nuances of the age were also not captured. Paul was to go out unto the gentiles and he used his status to avoid much persecution playing the "Roman citizen" card when he needed. The differences between the rebellious Messianic Jewish Christian hunted by Rome and the more tolerated gentile conversions was well beyond the Bible studies of the script writers, or else the idea was too complex to work in. Roman soldiers were not atheists. Scholars claim they were mostly followers of Mithra, a religion which had similarities to Christianity and influenced the church of Rome.
The modern setting for this Paul seemed to have been some kind of implication Jesus (not mentioned) was a recent event, although there was a fully formed Bible in the church indicating this was just history repeating itself, perhaps for a second coming...which would mean God has about the same imagination as people who make the remake the same as the original.
The conversion of Paul took the middle third of the film. It was perhaps the climax or highlight of the film if not the most uplifting. Unfortunately the dialogue was stiff. The acting was hit or miss with Vanessa Ore's attempt at a dramatic scene begging for a retake. There are worse acted Christian films out there, but by the same token there are much better ones.
The simplistic unrealistic script was the film's biggest downfall. The bad guys wear black in case you had trouble figuring things out.
Rome actually had trials. I was confused why modern society needed salt mines to create a New World Order, which is why they were after Peter because he had the map. The nuances of the age were also not captured. Paul was to go out unto the gentiles and he used his status to avoid much persecution playing the "Roman citizen" card when he needed. The differences between the rebellious Messianic Jewish Christian hunted by Rome and the more tolerated gentile conversions was well beyond the Bible studies of the script writers, or else the idea was too complex to work in. Roman soldiers were not atheists. Scholars claim they were mostly followers of Mithra, a religion which had similarities to Christianity and influenced the church of Rome.
The modern setting for this Paul seemed to have been some kind of implication Jesus (not mentioned) was a recent event, although there was a fully formed Bible in the church indicating this was just history repeating itself, perhaps for a second coming...which would mean God has about the same imagination as people who make the remake the same as the original.
The conversion of Paul took the middle third of the film. It was perhaps the climax or highlight of the film if not the most uplifting. Unfortunately the dialogue was stiff. The acting was hit or miss with Vanessa Ore's attempt at a dramatic scene begging for a retake. There are worse acted Christian films out there, but by the same token there are much better ones.
The simplistic unrealistic script was the film's biggest downfall. The bad guys wear black in case you had trouble figuring things out.
