Jesus Christ... Superstar

I only have time to write this blog because one of my classes was moved an hour later, and I forgot and showed up to an empty classroom, and now have an hour to kill.

So, ever since a couple years ago, when I walked into Kim's and they were playing this movie downstairs, I have wanted to watch Jesus Christ Superstar. Nearly the entire thing is posted on youtube, so I "prepped" myself and finally worked up the will to rent it.

As you may or may not know, Jesus Christ Superstar was a rock-opera double-album *before* it was ever staged as a musical. The album, from what I can tell, "stars" Ian Gillan, the lead singer of Deep Purple, as Jesus---a part he obviously was unfit to play in the film version. The premise of the whole thing is, Jesus as a charismatic proto-rock-star, with fans and groupies, etc.

What I am surprised at, is not that Christian groups protested the musical, but that they did it for all the wrong reasons and have evidently now embraced it. Because, kitsch aside, the film is completely heretical and anti-Christian. (Which was surprising to me).

Main heresies:
- That the deification of Christ is just a "myth."
- That his immediate followers "twisted around" his words (ie: the Gospels)
- That his political mission was more important than his personal charisma, for which it was sacrificed.
- Judas is resurrected (for the main show number: he descends in white fringe on a cross from heaven), but not Jesus.
- The Crucifixion scene is a bum-out after which everyone gets on the bus and leaves, wondering what "went wrong."
- That Jesus didn't die for our sins, but rather for some mistaken hubris and political naivete.
- That Jesus' mission on earth was not really a success.

WHOA. I can't believe that Christians go to see this. As I was telling my co-watcher, if there is ONE principle of Christianity, it is Jesus' divinity, which this movie shits all over. So bizarre.

There are the requisite horrible songs, the shameless pastiche of soul styles onto klezmer, folk, gospel, and faux-orchestral parts; NO sets; the entire film is shot from 50 yards away from the actors; Judas has all the best songs but Jesus' are easily the worst; there are plenty of false notes and self-conscious kitsch, where one wants to say, Who felt the need to ADD kitsch to this?; and finally, it's a directorial hack job-- Norman Jewison.

Evidently, reasons for protesting this film in the day (1973) have now been turned into the bedrock of the Christian youth movement: irony, "rock" music, a bunch of kids having fun, slight irreverence (calling Jesus "JC"), little attention to church dogma, etc. In short, a total triumph of style over substance, which is ironic, because the movie is so awkwardly-insistent upon its substance. Or maybe that's just me, who can't believe that any Christian would go along with this movie's point: basically a replication of Borges' story, "Three Versions of Judas"--Judas is the real protagonist of the Gospels, his suicide is the real martyrdom, etc. What remains (for me) is to think how much the movie intends its blasphemies *as such*, ie: if Tim Rice really thinks, "Jesus should have done things differently and not thrown his political mission away on this fantasy of being god," or...well...that seems to be the only option right now.

And, to anyone who thinks it is weird that I am thinking about this, or watching this movie, well--then you don't really know me. But I should say, the movie is pretty much HORRIBLE, and I totally recommend it, but not in a "so bad it's good" way; rather, in an "it's horrible AND it's good" way.