A little too old to play Christ!
-
clarencejr — 18 years ago(December 23, 2007 11:15 PM)
I disagree. Just finished watching King of Kings on TCM. I thought he embodied the characteristics we attribute to Jesus. I was actually impressed with his physicality without exuding sexuality, which I think Valentino would of, no doubt, been unable to curb. This is an artistic portrayal. I was very impressed with this 1927 film.
-
fast_fierce_and_funny — 17 years ago(April 18, 2008 06:44 PM)
2000
Couldn't DeMille find a younger actor more suited for this role? This makes absolutely no sense to me, especially since Warner didn't particularly look that young. I guess Valentino and Bushman (Francis X.) weren't available! Good silent. Poor casting.
Frankly, I found myself taking a look at a book I have (
Dead Before Their Time
) to find Valentino's exact date of death. I knew he had died in 1926, but wasn't sure of the month and day (August 23).
I thought for sure that Valentino had Punted Big before
King of Kings
was made, but it turns out I was wrong. And therefore I wasn't able to make a snotty remark on the board about how Valentino was indeed unavoidably detained and was most certainly
not
available for
King
.
However, it may interest you to learn that DeMille had originally intended to cast HB Warner's younger (by 20 years) brother, JB Warner, as Christ. However, it seems that JB Warner was unavoidably detained in November 1924, making him unavailable for the role.
So DeMille turned to JB's older brother, HB Warner, to fill the part.
I'll have to see
King of Kings
for myself to assess HB's performance. Knowing Cecil B. DeMille as I do, I find it hard to believe that he would grossly miscast the star role in one of his films.
And while I haven't seen HB's performance in
King of Kings,
I've certainly seen him in enough movies to appreciate the fact that he was a very capable actor. -
MissMellieY — 16 years ago(December 27, 2009 02:29 PM)
If you go to JB Warner's IMDB site you will see that he was actually NOT HB Warner's brother. If I remember correctly, he was raised by HB Warner's parents but was not his brother.
"A man's kiss is his signature" Mae West -
elena-28 — 17 years ago(May 14, 2008 07:43 AM)
My father and I watched this together a while ago on TCM. He vaguely recalled it from when he was a child in Spain, and vaguely remembered liking it. We were both taken aback at first at the first full glimpse of Warner, but it didn't take long to adjust, and, months later, he remains in my memory, more strongly and more positively than pretty much any other movie depiction of Jesus I've seen. Particularly touching is the scene with the children and the doll; and the Lazarus scene is very powerful and humanely-handled. The B&W cinematography is luminous, and Joseph Schildkraut (sp?) makes for an intriguing and complex Judas.
-
SeemsSensible — 16 years ago(April 12, 2009 09:33 PM)
I agree. The movie is on right now on TCM, and when the Jesus "reveal" (you see Mary talking to him, but not whom her gaze is on, and the little blind girl is talking, again you don't see to whom) is shown, i.e., the face of Jesus, I thought, Wow, that looks more like Moses than a 30-year-old Jesus. So I came here to see how old H.B. Warner was. As you say, 52-and looks it.
I know the knock on Jeffrey Hunter in the 1961 Nicholas Ray version was that he was too young-looking, although he was 33 at the time (people dubbed the movie, "I Was a Teenage Jesus") but he looked more authentic than H.B. Warner here. -
joyce-miller3-1 — 16 years ago(April 17, 2009 10:59 AM)
At 52 years old, Mr. Warner was a lot too old to play the 33 year old Christ. While Mr. DeMille could have easily found younger actors to play the role, I don't think any other actor could have conveyed the essense of Christ the way Mr. Warner did. His gaze was perfect and appropriate at all times. I found myself almost believing he WAS Christ. He's the only actor in that role who made me feel that way. So, for that reason, regardless of Mr. Warner's age, I believe he was the perfect choice to play that role.
-
l_grds — 16 years ago(December 21, 2009 02:56 PM)
"King of Kings" was shown again last night. I agree with your remarks. I believe Warner was too old, but strangely, during the crucifixion scene, he revealed a young-looking physique. At times he gave an ethereal, other-worldly effect to his character which made him believable as Jesus. I went back and forth during the movie thinking one moment that he was too old, then seeing him give just the right touch to a scene which made him seem right for the role. I was very moved by the scene with the blind girl. I felt that the movie was, over all, very well done. The scenes at the end of the earthquake and the wind were excellent. I also felt that Joseph Schildkraut and his real-life father, Rudolph, who played "Caiphas" were excellent too.
-
vinidici — 15 years ago(October 22, 2010 07:57 AM)
I'm not among those who think H.B. Warner's age prevented him from delivering the best screen portrayal of Jesus Christ I've ever seen. His Jesus is, to use the title of Andre Andolin's book, a true "Man of Steel and Velvet"a strong, rugged, courageous man ("steel"), yet bearing a countenance that suggests being full of wisdom, love and compassion ("velvet"). To my mind, no other actor as Jesus has portrayed all of these qualities the way Warner did, despite the 19-year age difference between himself and the Lord (Warner, 52, and Jesus, believed to be 33 at the time of His crucifixion).
-
sumankey13 — 10 years ago(March 28, 2016 12:38 AM)
Just saw The King of Kings mostly from the beginning (on Easter!) and we were commenting how it was kind of refreshing to have a slightly older, wise and kind looking Jesus as opposed to the sometimes too young or Hollywood versions of Jesus in many movies
very fine film and fun to watch an old 1927!! classic portrayal by the awesomeness that was Cecille B. DeMille!
cheers
Sometimes, I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion!