King of Kings (1961)
7/10
Very staid, slow and serious...yet consistently engaging
15 January 2024
The story of Jesus is probably the most famous story of all time. This telling of it doesn't do anything original, unlike say 1953's The Robe. But originality doesn't necessarily mean quality. The Robe is worth watching because of these interesting ideas despite its flaws, whereas King of Kings is worth watching despite its unoriginality.

What this 1961 does do is provide 3 hours of consistent solid engaging story-telling, of a tale we all already know. The dialogue is stiff, as if we're reading the Bible out loud, however it fits the atmosphere. The conservative seriousness doesn't get tiring as the camera & production does fine dynamic work, keeping us immersed.

The cast are all decent. Jeffrey Hunter as the blue-eyed wonder does well to imbue a sense of aura around his character. The teenage Brigid Bazlen is incredible as Salomé, delivering the film's outstanding scene. A dark uncontrollable irresistible witchy presence. I'm quite sure at least one japanese horror director has seen her sitting before the throne after the dance and thought "I'm gonna make my demonic ghost look like that".

King of Kings doesn't quite hit the heights of more famous epics like Ben Hur, Spartacus - or my personal favourite John Huston's The Bible - as it's a bit too 'safe'. And despite being Jesus-focussed we don't get too much detail or insight into his or his disciples lives.

Still, there's no real flaws in this effort. Well worth watching if you're in the mood for one of those old biblical epics, it will satisfy that itch.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed