The Young Messiah (2016) User Reviews

The Education of Jesus bar Joseph

[lavatch · 7/10 · 19 July 2016]

In the bonus segment of the DVD version of "The Young Messiah," the screenwriter described how the goal of the script was "informed conjecture" about the life of young Jesus bar Joseph. In turn, the conjectural screenplay was based on the Anne Rice novel "Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt." One of the strengths of the film is the choice of shooting sites, especially the town of Matera in Italy, which stood for Jerusalem. The roads, rivers, and mountain locales were also stunning.

But the heart of the film is the story of a year in the life of the young Jesus bar Joseph. The two main strands of the narrative are: 1) the action scenes in which the young messiah is pursued by the Roman centurions, seeking to kill the boy at the behest of King Herod; and 2) the drama of determining the precise moment when the kind parents will reveal to the boy that he is son of God.

The actors are uniformly earnest in their roles. The child actor playing Jesus is excellent, and the performers playing Mary and Joseph are also very convincing. Jane Lapotaire turns in a good character performance as Old Sarah. And Christian McKay as Cleopas, the uncle of Jesus, is a scene-stealer in his robust and slightly cynical character.

If there is a criticism to be aired about the film, it would be in the one-dimensional treatment of the story and the characters. There is a highly melodramatic rendition of a creepy devil, lurking in the background and taunting the boy Jesus at every turn. And the over-the-top interpretation of King Herod was cloying. Even Joseph and Mary were somewhat saccharine in their one-dimensional wholesomeness. At one point, Mary is praying and asks forgiveness for her sins that day. But there is nary a blemish on her spotless character evident in the entire year encompassed by this motion picture.

Tries too hard

[SpiritMechanic · 5/10 · 13 March 2016]

I think to make a movie about a non fictional character without any information or facts of the actual story, is a mistake. Especially this kind of story. There were things done in the beginning of this movie that were just plain wrong, and clearly wrong according to the biblical writings. He didn't do ANY miracles until the age of 30 the bible clearly states and i'll leave it at that. I wish people would stop trying to make Jesus someone other than He really was. This movie felt like it stole a little from 'Risen' which was a very good movie, surprisingly. Too much free license with this movie left me cringing many times at the things that were shown. The Devil, the ignorance of Jesus, Mary being worry full and Joseph being the strong minded one, quoting from the King James version of the bible which wasn't even made yet... Little stuff like that bugs me. If this wasn't a movie about Jesus, i could see it being a decent movie. But, it was. And it falls flat for me because they tried too hard to make it fit into what we would want it to look like if we could really see Him at such a young age. "Risen" had a great concept because it could have actually happened, but the way this move was written, it could not have happened the way it was portrayed. it is what it is i guess.

Benignly Boring

[bkrauser-81-311064 · 5/10 · 13 March 2016]

Out of all the reviews I have written thus far, this one may arguably be the toughest. Not because Young Messiah is a particularly good movie; it's not. I struggle because while it might be easy to lampoon a movie for being amateurish, inept, casually racist, remarkably insincere, thematically dubious and egregiously pandering; this movie's greatest sin however is it's a bore. Clocking in at a sluggish one hour and fifty one minutes, I constantly was asking myself if this film might have been improved if they replaced all the supporting characters with mannequins. Perhaps if Graham Chapman's ghost popped up and sung "Always Look on the Bright Side of Life" there'd be signs of actual, you know, life.

The film starts with the young Jesus (Greaves-Neal) living in Alexandria with his parents Joseph (Walsh), Mary (Lazzaro) and their extended family. After drawn-out moments of pensive staring and one half-hearted occasion of necromancy, the family decides to trek back to Judiah since the infamous King Herod is dead. Then the family walks, and walks, and walks until finally they don't. They stop in Nazareth, then Jerusalem slowly realizing that their movements are being monitored by Severus (Bean), a Roman centurion tasked with finding a certain seven-year-old with a knack for miracles.

The main source of attempted tension comes from Severus and Herod Jr. (Bailey) trying to find the mythic child of Bethlehem. The film takes great pains in making Herod as traditionally evil as possible complete with effeminate, overly dramatic mannerisms, a testy anger and an almost stunning lack of awareness. Sean Bean fairs a little better as Severus by simply phoning it in as the bad guy with a complicated past. Yet even his jaded, near expressionless presence can't make the film exciting. The moments of "chase" are largely missed connections with supporting characters pointing north and saying "he went that a- way." Meanwhile Severus prattles on about Roman steel. We all know the story of Jesus, or at least we know enough to assume he's not captured by Romans at seven-years-old so why is this dull chase the centerpiece of this dribble? At no point in time will a reasonable viewer think Jesus is in any real harm so why the cloak and daggers BS?

The secondary source of tension comes from Joseph's unwillingness to speak to Jesus about his origins because of...reasons. What those reasons are, we're never made privy to. Half-realized conversations happen with such regularity that one would be hard-pressed to find anyone's reasons for doing anything in this movie. Jesus on the other hand seems to take things in stride, performing miracles, showing off in front of rabbis and otherwise being the embodiment of Christ in miniature form. That's great and all, but he's not exactly an interesting character. Instead he's every "the one," "the special," the superhero Metropolis needs," we've seen thousands of times before. I understand Jesus's tale is the granddaddy of all heroes journeys but this film approaches the source material with such a pitiful lack of imagination that Jesus doesn't feel like a messiah but an X-Man.

With a subject so revered by countless believers, I'm surprised just how painfully conventional Young Messiah is. The film is adapted from "Christ the Lord: Out of Egypt" written by Anne Rice who injects religious iconography into all her books with such regularity, that I'm surprised she's not a nun by now. Brought to moribund life by director Cyrus Nowrasteh, the cinematography and editing is film-school, senior thesis level atypical. There are some moments approaching the ethereal in the vein of music video expressionism, but then we're brought right back into the heavy- handed pandering that's become a hallmark of these kinds of movies.

The best thing that can be said about Young Messiah is at least it panders without fear-mongering or demonizing other groups. Movies like God's Not Dead (2014) and Left Behind (2014) preach with such bluster, that the only thing stopping them from being malignantly harmful is their amateurishness. I long for the day when we expect more from these kinds of movies other than them being benignly boring. It is possible, if you're willing to sit through rarefied gems like The Tree of Life (2011) or Au Hasard Balthazar (1966) or The Passion of Joan of Arc (1928). Otherwise you may just have to get your spiritual fulfillment watching your nephew's nativity play.

A little latitude, please . . .

[S74rw4rd · 12 August 2021]

Let's face it: no Gospel or historical source asserts, or even suggests, that Jesus met a character named Ben-Hur, gave him a drink of cold water and stared down a centurion who didn't appreciate it, cured Mom and Sister Hur of leprosy, and then paused on His way to the cross to receive a drink of cold water from Ben-Hur. Didn't happen folks; ain't in the Bible. But these fictional possibilities were woven together by Civil War general under his beech tree in Indiana, and in Sante Fe while he was governor of the New Mexico Territory where he offered amnesty to Billy the Kid, just like in Young Guns II. But when Lew Wallace presented his novel, BEN-HUR, to the world, it has not only been in print continuously, it has also inspired three films, at least; inspired President Garfield to appoint Wallace as Minister to the Ottoman Empire; gave its name to a sandwich sold in a diner in Crawfordville, IN, and also named a mutual burial insurance society, also in Crawfordsville. All that, and it was FICTIONAL, based upon what Lew Wallace thought was plausible.

The Young Messiah is exactly the same genre. It does not claim to be a Biblical explication, nor does it quietly pretend to be. It presents a fictional child of Jesus based upon plausibilities, accounts both Scriptural and outside the Bible, and a little bit of poetic vision thrown in. Same thing that Lew Wallace did in Ben Hur.

Yes we can quibble about details. I, too, believe that the Three Wise Men (whom I believe to be certain Roman notables, but I will not say who in this forum) arrived when Jesus was a toddler. But, shucks, Lew Wallace puts them in Bethlehem shortly after Jesus' birth, and two major films put them right next to the shepherds who also visited the stable---just like in the nativity figurines we purchase the day after Thanksgiving from better department stores. Not Biblically accurate---nope---but they still broadcast Charlton Heston as Ben Hur at Easter time. The same latitude should be granted to this movie. The Young Messiah film deserves to inherit the latitude established for it by its predecessors---Lew Wallace, Edward Bulwer-Lytton, Henryk Sienkiewicz, and even Par Lagerkvist. El Greco painted a crucifixion scene, but the city depicted behind Christ on the Cross was not Jerusalem but Toledo in Spain---now that's latitude---and it is considered a priceless masterpiece.

When I was a Junior in High School, my A. P. literature class was expected to read all of John Milton's epic poem, Paradise Lost, in three weeks. I wondered how such a long poem could be derived from such a slender account in the Biblical book of Genesis. Then I found out how: John Milton, with that great organ-like iambic pentameter, used some latitude; a whole lot of latitude, to create a magnificent poetic masterpiece. So, instead of quibling about exact details, as if this film were a lesson in Sunday School, let's receive it as a work of art intended in the same spirit as these other pieces of literature and art that I have cited.

I have been a Christian since 1994, and recently converted to the Eastern Orthodox Faith. My Orthodox faith is not disturbed by the film. I am only an amateur in film appreciation, although a published poet elsewhere, and I found the photography beautiful, the dialogue convincing, and the portrait of Jesus poignant, winsome, and a little bit fun (not like reading Kazantzakis' Last Temptation Of Christ). My faith is not so weak that an inaccuracy in the film will cause me to lose my spiritual balance. I just keep telling myself, "It's only a mpvie, only a movie." A very fine movie; at times, a very spiritual movie; and throughout, a very human movie. It deserves as much respect as our inaccurate Nativity scenes that we put up on the mantle, above the Christmas stockings hanging there, on Thanksgiving afternoon, after Grandma's fine Turkey with all the fixin's.

The hidden years .

[ulicknormanowen · 6/10 · 25 April 2022]

The first thirty years of the life of the Christ are not well known and are generally considered spiritual and manual apprenticeship ; so most of the events depicted in the movie are invented .

The episode in Egypt is too storylike and thus not very convincing .When the Holy Family returns to their native land ,things go better ;the depiction of their country ,dominated by the Romans where the kings are puppets in their hands is more successful : a centurion ,played by earnest thespian Sean Bean, searches ,a la Javert , the child who has escaped the massacre of the innocents .

The best sequence is in the Gospel according to St Luke :At the age of 12,Jesus travelelled to Jerusalem for Passover ; Jesus was left behind and His parents found Him 3 days later, teaching the elders of the temple :Jesus knew who He was and He was preparing Himself for His earthly minestry. This reminds us of our Sunday school days.

A mysterious character follows Jesus during all these years ,probably to induce Him into temptation : the Devil probably.

Too bad Jesus the Carpenter is passed over in silence ; the young actor playing the Christ has a beaming face , but the overall results are mixed.

Did they forget to read the actual Bible

[merrillmount · 2/10 · 26 August 2016]

There are so many things wrong with this movie. I am fine that they wanted to make a speculative movie about Jesus as a youth, but at least use the facts we do know. Let's start with the fact that they have him meet the Wise Men as a babe. He was close to 2 years old when they arrive. Also Joseph and Mary had left prior to the children being killed. Then the reason they leave Egypt since they are told it is safe. Ummmm, this movie is all about it not being safe. Then they have him going to the temple at age 7, he was 12. And why do they always have Jesus not knowing who he is? I am pretty certain Joseph and Mary told Christ who He was from the earliest days. And even if they didn't He would know since He is the Son of God. Yes everyone knows the secret that He is God except Him. I don't buy it. About the only thing they got correct was I am sure Satan tried to tempt him. Serious Train Wreck!

Comcast's THE YOUNG MESSIAH is far more dangerous to Fundamentalist Believers . . .

[oscaralbert · 6/10 · 14 March 2016]

. . . than either THE LIFE OF BRIAN or THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHR!ST. Based upon a book by infamous Satanist Anne Rice, MESSIAH portrays The Virgin Mary as of blue-eyed chick of Estonian descent (something anyone familiar with Basic Biology knows). At this point, a True Fundamentalist is forced to choose between being arrested for Disturbing the Peace when they stand up and yell "Blasphemy! You lie!" at the Big Screen, or they must admit to themselves that they're "lukewarm whited sepulchers" with no True Belief in the Holy Bible that they've been beating everyone over the head with prior to attending MESSIAH. Fundamentalists supposedly believe that the Bible is Correct in every word, and Complete, as Dictated by God Himself. But the Book of Anne Rice contradicts The Bible 98% of the time. If Fundamentalists haven't spent ALL their church time watching NFL and NASCAR on their cell phones, they KNOW that Jesus' first miracle was turning water into wine at the Canaan wedding reception. But Anne Rice has a seven-year-old Jesus raising dead animals and people left and right, healing everyone in sight, but somehow totally lacking a Divine Omniscience! Comcast and Ms. Rice do a good job of promoting Jesus' camel happy meal toys, but they rewrite all the Holy Gospels, reordering historic events and the lives of historic people by 25 years Willy Nilly, and popping Satan Himself onto the screen whenever they feel that their blasphemous tale is starting to drag. If Comcast's Satanist Department is given continued free reign, they'll muddy the formerly crystal clear waters of the Gospels beyond recognition!

Jesus has no clue he's the Son of God.

[suegrise · 3/10 · 11 March 2016]

Be informed! The Young Messiah's high production quality probably makes its content more disturbing, because many people will see it and form a concept of Jesus from it. Like The Da Vinci Code, the film—based on a novel by Anne Rice (Interview With the Vampire)—is loosely based on Gnostic texts widely deemed heretical. (In those texts, the boy Jesus strikes a playmate dead and then resurrects him, makes clay birds alive, etc.) The story's main premise is that young Jesus has no clue he's the Son of God. As in the Harry Potter saga, the young hero gradually discovers his supernatural powers and struggles to control them and to discover his destiny. Yet it's being billed as a "Christian-themed" Easter film and even being supported by some big ministry groups. Mary and Joseph try to protect Jesus from the backlash from his accidental miracles. In a totally fictional suspense subplot, Herod discovers Jesus' name, age, home, and family and sends a Roman soldier to track and kill him. Don't be bamboozled—read the Bible for yourself.

A Fascinating tale and an Enjoyable Watch!

[cmoreland-50752 · 10/10 · 15 February 2021]

A lot of people are rating this low because it's not biblically accurate. I am a Christian, but I usually HATE Christian movies; they are usually so cheesy and poorly made. But this movie pleasantly surprised me. Here's the thing: In the bible, we are given VERY little detail about Jesus' childhood. This movie is an exploration on a short time in Jesus' childhood and what it might have looked like. It's an interesting take on what it MIGHT have been like, but probably wasn't and that's fine. Just go into this movie knowing that the creators took a lot of artistic liberties. And I think those artistic liberties worked very well. It was moving and exciting and at times, very funny. The acting was great and the script was better than any Christian movie I've ever seen. It's an impactful movie that is loosely based on historical figures, but mostly an imagined tale rooted in the Savior of the World's innocent youth.

Very enjoyable

[brutzel · 7/10 · 13 August 2016]

Jesus (Adam Greaves-Neal), Mary (Sara Lazzaro) and Joseph (Vincent Walsh) had fled from Bethlehem to Egypt to avoid King Herod's decree of killing every male baby hoping to kill Jesus, a rival that threatened him. When they learn of King Herod's death, the family returns home to Nazareth only to become aware that Herod's son (Jonathan Bailey) is after the same thing as his father. Jesus at 7-years of age is aware that his family is keeping secrets from him.

The birth of Jesus, the finding of Jesus in the Temple by Mary, and the wedding in Canaan are the three events we are most familiar with until Jesus begins his ministry at 30-years of age. In this story we see that Jesus doesn't really know who he is. He can do things like perform miracles, but doesn't know why he can do these things. He asks many questions and eventually Mary tells him of his birth and who he really is and that he must hide his powers until God tells him when he can use them.

We see Roman Centurion Severus (Sean Bean) ordered by Herod to find and kill Jesus and this takes up most of the movie. And yes, they do meet for a second time. (A second time???)

We also see The Demon (Rory Keenan) following Jesus as he is not sure who Jesus is. Jesus is the only one who can see and hear The Demon.

This is not a Christian exposé, so to speak, so we do not get a lot of Christianity and benefits thereof. But no worries as this Is not a revival. (Thank you)

This is a story made up by Anne Rice - the Vampire authoress - about a boy learning who he is and the family and friends protecting him from harm.

However, if those of you who have read the Valtorta books you know Jesus knew who he was from the very start. Be that as it may, this is a refreshing look into "maybe it was like this." Everything was constructive and nothing was destructive and it's a very enjoyable story.

You can almost believe that Jesus may have looked like and behaved as we see Adam Greaves-Neal behave in this story. And that's a nice touch.

This is a well presented production and the acting all around is very good. (7/10)

Violence: Yes, some not much. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Language: No.

Not even biblical !

[michaelamir-25066 · 3/10 · 20 September 2018]

The film is not biblical in any way it is just fiction. My own idea is that Jesus already knew his message since he was born cause he wasn't just a little human boy he was the logos the incarnate Word of God. But it is good in being creative.

Loved this depiction of Jesus

[btreakle · 10/10 · 20 November 2020]

I thought this is a great adaptation of the young story of Jesus of Nazareth . Although e-discovery poor reviews and I MB Di thought it was a good story.

I thought that I was going to a Bible film but . . .

[pixrox1 · 6/10 · 20 March 2016]

. . . then a Harry Potter movie broke out. All the elements of J.K. Rowling's Beloved Batch of children's stories are present in THE YOUNG MESSIAH flick, with the exception of Hogwarts School (perhaps the producers of this controversial flick are saving that for a possible sequel--when you grab a random name from History, and then invent 99% of your plot and dialogue, you theoretically can create a Never-Ending-Story, along the lines of the seemingly infinite but self-confessed fictional film franchises for James Bond and Star Trek). In the role of boy wizard Harry, a seven-year-old lad dubbed "Jesus" here amazes his peer group of fellow youngsters by transforming things and bringing critters or people to life, left and right. Filling the Muggle part of Harry's Cousin Dudley Dursley is a similarly husky bully named Eleazer. THE YOUNG MESSIAH's Hermione counterpart seems to be a winsome and doting female cousin to Jesus. Since you cannot have a Harry Potter without He Who Must Not Be Named (VOLDEMORT!), there's an unnamed character here that's omnipresent at THE YOUNG MESSIAH's elbow (SATAN!). One could go on, or you can see the picture for yourself.

Not based on verified evidence

[jonply · 2/10 · 4 March 2017]

It wasn't until seeing the credits that I found this is based on an Anne Rice (Interview With The Vampire) novel of the same name. Had I know that, I would not have seen it before reading the reviews.

Information is collected from sources that have no secular evidence in antiquity, and much of the information is over dramatized by the writer. Granted, the Bible does not disclose the Savior's life around this period, but the referenced miracles are from the apocrypha documents that cannot be dated to the time of Christ (some of them being up to 300 years after the event).

If you are looking for reasonable fiction, this film gets a 5 of 10 vote. If you are looking for a faith-based or spiritual movie, as the name suggests, look elsewhere.

game with Gnostic texts

[Kirpianuscus · 21 June 2016]

first - a bizarre film. for the not inspired cast, for the large isles of non sense, for the absence of precise purpose. it is not a Christian film and not a religious one. only a strange embroidery of fragments from the Gnostic Gospels, few good actors in uncomfortable roles and a chaotic story. the dialogues, the acting, the generous message - all is fake or wrong or almost blasphemy. result - a kind of surrogate. the young Adam Greaves - Neal is far to be the perfect choice for a role who represents only source of confusion. Sara Lazzaro must be a second Olivia Hussley from the Jesus of Zeffireli. but her role remains a sketch. Jonathan Bailey gives a barefooted Herod without any precise purpose because his status is only as decoration. Sean Bean, the poor Sean Bean... Jane Lapotaire does her the best try but the old Sarah is impossible to be credible as result of confuse script. the Bible is ignored and the Gnostic texts as used only as pretext. the result - a film with interesting idea about nothing. or only an exercise of blasphemy.

Starts out Aimless, Gets a Bit Better

[dutchs-1 · 6/10 · 18 March 2016]

How to make a period piece about Jesus. Jewish males have absurdly black beards and are all cock-sure in their self-righteousness. All the priests are Downton Abbey arrogant. Evil characters are dissolute or ludicrously effeminate. Roman soldiers are craggy tough guys with a five-day stubble, but open to the truth.

When you have precisely zero historical information to go on, you make things up. Just as early map makers put imaginary lands in the blank places, people made up stories to fill in the long gap in Jesus' narrative. This film incorporates a couple of items from early pseudo-Gospels. The film opens with a seriously unsavory episode of Jesus being bullied. Jesus is a picture-perfect child with long wavy hair and a veddy British accent. The bully trips and falls and is killed, and Jesus is blamed, but brings him back to life again. The family decides it's time to leave their exile in Egypt and go home, and encounter a succession of vignettes to show just what a bad neighborhood Galilee was back then.

The film gets better once it develops a focus. Like the far better "Risen," the film becomes something of a procedural. Herod junior has heard rumors of a wonder-working child and dispatches centurion Severus to find him. They got a good actor (Sean Bean) to play Severus, but Herod is a whiny, superstitious wimp. Severus and his troops clomp around Galilee, finally learn that Jesus and his family are on the way to the Temple (No, not the same visit as recorded in the gospels - Jesus is eight in the movie, not twelve). Jesus talks to a blind priest and in the process cures him. Severus sees this, realizes he's up against something beyond him, and lets the family go. He returns to Herod and reports that he killed the child (i.e., lies), pointing out that it was Herod's order.

The other intertwined plot is that Jesus is just beginning to become aware that he's special, and Joseph stubbornly refuses to answer his questions. So Jesus looks first to the rabbi in Nazareth, then prods his family to take him to Jerusalem. Jesus is a typical eight year old, if you know any eight year olds who look 14, and have the theological knowledge of a rabbi and the diction and vocabulary of an English Lit professor. Did Jesus ever fall and skin his knee? Did he ever bang his thumb with a hammer, cut himself, measure something wrong or split a piece of wood in the carpenter shop? Because any sign that Jesus was ever less than omnipotent and omniscient is bound to rattle some people.

Soft, warm, without emotion or depth.

[filipemanuelneto · 2/10 · 15 March 2020]

This film addresses the childhood of Jesus Christ and is based on a novel by Anne Rice, an author who has been an atheist for years, and this book will have been written shortly after her conversion to the Christian faith. Jesus is the most striking historical and religious figure in all of human history and it means so much to so many people that it is necessary to treat him with care when making a film. Making this film was a bold and courageous step, but also dangerous, as we know almost nothing about Jesus' life during his childhood and youth.

The film, as I said, is largely based on an Anne Rice novel, and it is most likely that the author has gone to seek most of her information about Jesus' youth from the Gnostic texts and the apocryphal gospels. There are immense ideas that the film conveys, moreover, they are totally at odds with the Catholic Church, which states that Jesus would not have worked miracles in his youth and had a normal childhood, except for the famous episode where, at the age of twelve, he disappears on his parents' side and is found debating with the doctors and wise men of the Jerusalem Temple. However, here we can see Jesus performing several miracles without knowing who he really is and why he is doing it. Blasphemy ... for those who believe what is in the Bible, of course.

When I saw the film, I felt that he tried to avoid being too preachy. However, the film is so lukewarm and makes such a mess with Jesus' youth that it is difficult to swallow. The cast's bland performance doesn't help. Adam Greaves-Neal is quite weak and warm for the character, he lacks charisma. Furthermore, he, Sara Lazzaro and Vincent Walsh seem too Western to represent Jews from the Middle East. In fact, this applies to virtually the entire cast. Rory Keenan has very strange hair and is bored in his role as Satan. Christian McKay was OK, but it sucks to see how an uncle of Jesus seems to know more about Jesus' future role than Jesus himself. Jonathan Bailey is weird and only exists in the film to bring a classic and manic villain to life.

Technically, we have everything we could hope for, without major surprises. A regular and nothing special photograph, sets and costumes that try to recreate the time but seem to have been made with material and props from the "Passion of the Christ", "Gladiator" (those Roman military uniforms) or from the "Rome" series. The soundtrack is as bland, dispassionate and warm as the film itself.

Jesus had to learn who he really was. It could be very true.

[greghomeusa-895-197426 · 6/10 · 13 March 2016]

It is a bold attempt to write a screenplay about young Messiah's life and turn it into movie since we have no canonical sources (perhaps it is so for a reason) apart from one clear episode in the Gospel. And the authors should be congratulated for this attempt (perhaps it is first one). For today's audience the movie would appear rather emotionally flat. And there is no special effects, not unexpected and shocking turns along the way. But it has good side too. It shows that the life of young Messiah probably was simple and very human. It shows that Jesus had to learn who he really was and his earthly parents had to help him to find it out. It could be very true.

Booooooring. Nuf said.

[aspegic-76734 · 3/10 · 24 February 2017]

Boring movie. Bad script. Bad casting (with the exception of Sean Bean). Slow pace would be an overstatement. Halfway through the movie I found myself rooting for the Romans. The only amazing thing about this movie is that they were able to make a trailer out of it that made me want to watch it. Hats of to the maker of the trailer. As for the rest... next please.

A glimpse into the eyes of Innocent Love!!!

[QueerVamp20 · 10/10 · 26 July 2016]

Take a breathtaking journey into a year in the life of "The Young Messiah". What was Jesus like as a kid? How do you explain what He went through to become who He is and was? Miracles are in this movie - A question-asking young boy who truly didn't know the power He would later use to save the souls of the Earth. Jesus is played by a beautiful young boy who is very good in his role. With his parents (Mary and Joseph), they flee the town they are in. On their journey, young Jesus begins to learn and do things He doesn't quite understand at first - Jesus as a child is so amazing because even with my being a Christian, it didn't make me look at Jesus any different than I do now (with respect and love) - Forgiveness was yet to be known - but Jesus was more than a forgiver, even as a child - Watch what happens and go see the movie - It's worth a watch.

A nice perspective on Messiah tale, though lighter on impact and narrative

[quincytheodore · 6/10 · 4 April 2016]

The story of Jesus' childhood may not be particularly well known compared to his more grand birth or ascension, although it does have a few appealing aspects. "The Young Messiah" tries to showcase the burden of destiny through the eyes of a child. It's not an extravagant story, but a more humble one with small production.

Most of the focus rests on Adam Greaves-Neal who plays the young Jesus, it's a lot to expect from a child actor. He performs on few better occasions, even though not every sequence can convey the weight. Still, the movie's hook is about innocence, and for that effect the simple casting might just work.

Sean Bean plays as a Centurion who works for Herod, the king who is afraid he will be dethroned by prophesied messiah. Sean Bean has done so many of similar roles, he looks like he is in the right era. There's also slight inclusion of heavy subject but it's well in the realm of family viewing.

Cinematography works in the scale it's designated in. The movie mainly transpires in small villages or medium sized town, which keeps the visual manageable. Along with the humor and mild theme, this is an accessible take on the famous life. It won't provide much philosophical content although it would be a decent family friendly drama.

Jesus Brother James

[carebearcar · 4/10 · 6 December 2020]

Think for a moment. Jesus was born from a Virgin Mary, but the movie made James older than Jesus.

What a fantastic movie!!!

[nowackiandrew · 9/10 · 13 April 2018]

Very well done, well paced, with beautiful cinematography and acting. Traces the life of Jesus as a child for a year. Does not follow scripture of course as it is based on an Anne Rice novel, but has the spirit of the Bible and is so well done.

Gods Plan

[mramirez-04168 · 7/10 · 18 November 2022]

The Young Messiah made in 2016 and directed by Cyrus Nowrasteh is an American biblical drama film. The film follows a young Jesus where he is troubled by his identity and his God-like powers.. The director cast Adam Greaves-Neal who plays Jesus, Sara Lazzaro who plays Mary, Sean Bean who plays Severus, Vincient Walsh who plays Joseph, and Johnathan Bailey who plays Herod. In The Young Messiah. The story begins in Alexandria, then on the road to Nazareth, and in Jerusalem.

Jesus Bar-Joseph, age 7, and his family are currently residing in Alexandria, Egypt after fleeing King Herod of Israel's planned killing of children. Jesus is aware that his parents, Joseph and Mary, are withholding information about his birth and characteristics that set him apart from other boys from him. But his parents think he's too young to understand the truth about his miraculous birth and destiny. They leave for their hometown of Nazareth in Israel after learning that the ruthless Herod has died, not realizing that Herod's named-son is just as determined as his father to have the young Jesus killed.

One thing I enjoyed from this movie was the creativity of the director. The creativity is what kept me entertained and I really enjoyed how the director was influenced by the Bible to make this fictional story about Jesus. Since we have little to no scripture about Jesus as a boy, I really enjoyed how Cyrus Nowrasteh was able to get so little information and be creative in the movie. I believe however that the movie should have been more biblical accurate, I did enjoy how the director used scripture to be creative and let him be influenced to create a story.

Another thing I enjoyed in the movie was the literary devices used in the film. One of them being foreshadowing. Many times in the film it shows clear moments where it's actually foreshadowing what Jesus is going to do for humanity. In the beginning of the film, Jesus resurrects Eliezer, which foreshadows the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Another instance is when the rebel jews sacrifice themselves for the life of Jesus. This also foreshadows the sacrifice Jesus gives us, as his gift to the world. I really enjoyed it because it kept on reminding me of the influence Scripture has had on this film. Even though it's a fictional story, it's always reminding us of John 3:16, where it states For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

Overall while I did enjoy the movie, I did find myself criticizing the film for its biblical accuracy. First of yall, Jesus was never 7 when he entered the temple. Luke 2:42 states " When he was twelve years old, they went up to the festival, according to the custom." Another point of criticism is when Jesus resurrects Eliezer, making this being Jesus first ever miracle. In scripture the first ever recorded miracle is in John 2:1-11. Where Jesus turns water into wine at a wedding. There are also other miracles that young Jesus does that are never recorded in the Bible. The fact that Jesus doesn't know who he is also false. John 1:1 states " In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." Jesus states that he is the word, he has been there from the beginning with God and knows who and what he has to do. So overall it's not really biblical accurate but still a great movie to watch.

False Narrative

[xlg_medium · 2/10 · 3 March 2017]

This movie depicts Christians as crazy, drunk and psychopaths. It's a perfect Obama film. Take all the credit and none of the blame until it suits their cause , be the marder . In the the Quran it says it's OK to lie to the infidel to gain their trust and put you into strength. Read between the lines.