Barabbas (1961)

8/10

An accidental miracle of a film from Hollywood, playing with darkness and light

JuguAbraham12 March 2018

Fascinating because it is based on a Nobel Prize winning novel and the film's most popular slice is the gladiator segment, which I am told was never a part of the novel! That's Hollywood. It is also the sequence that presents the arch villain of Hollywood, Jack Palance at his evil best.

I have not read the novel and I have not seen the earlier Swedish film by director Alf Sjoberg--both are great works, I believe.

What is great about Fleischer's "Barabbas"? The casting is accidentally superb--Yul Brynner was to play the Quinn part initially. And this is arguably Quinn's best work. So is the case of Sylvano Mangano, again the most memorable work of hers. Jack Palance, Arthur Kennedy and Ernest Borgnine are fascinating. Ms Mangano's brother plays the cameo of Jesus.

For the religious, the eclipse during the crucifiction of Christ was real, not a studio trick. At the same time one needs to know that director Fleischer had planned it in advance. It was not a "miracle" at all.

Starting from the amazing low-angle opening shot of the film, the film has very creditable photography. The cinematographer is Aldo Tonti who gave us the lovely images in Fellini's classic "Night of Cabiria" (1957).

For me, "Barabbas" is the best Biblical and the best sword-and-sandals work Hollywood and Cinecitta ever made. A miracle by itself, not just the mere work of a great novelist! A great subject to meditate on--darkness versus light, thanks to the author of the Nobel-Prize winning novel.

10 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

Just Where Do Some of Those Peripheral Bible Characters Go?

bkoganbing7 December 2005

I've often wondered at times from a literary as well as religious point of view what happens to some of the peripheral cast of characters in the Scripture. I'm sure that's a question that more than a few have pondered on, whether they are believers or not.

Case in point is Barabbas. All we know about him is that he was the guy that the mob shouted for when offered a choice between pardoning him or Jesus of Nazareth. Some tradition has him as a common bandit, others have him as a rebel against Rome.

As played by Anthony Quinn, Barabbas is a troubled soul. As the message of Jesus of Nazareth spreads, Barabbas is unsure of what his role is. He's realized he's been a participant in something historic to say the least. But people treat him differently. The early Christians view him with some resentment. To Pontius Pilate, played by Arthur Kennedy, Barabbas is still a no good bandit. Of course Barabbas gets himself arrested again and begins his odyssey.

The movie is an adaption of a novel by Swedish Pulitzer Prize Winning writer Par Lagerkvist and a Swedish film adaption had already been filmed prior to this international cast epic. Might be interesting to view it side by side with this one. I'm sure the Swedish film didn't have half the budget this one did.

The movie fuzzes certain issues as films of this type generally do. Pacifism is a tenet of the early Christian faith of those hiding in the catacombs. Turning the other cheek is a big thing. But Anthony Quinn isn't a Christian so his modus operandi isn't exactly turning the other cheek.

Some top flight professionals are in this cast. The aforementioned Arthur Kennedy as Pilate, Silvana Mangano as Barabbas's girl friend who becomes an early convert, Vittorio Gassman as Sahek who is Barabbas's martyred Christian friend and most of all Jack Palance in a scene stealing performance as the top gladiator in Rome. You should watch this film for him alone.

The message the film tries to convey is that Barabbas in and of himself wasn't important. Jesus's life and death were pre-ordained and it could have been Barabbas or any of hundreds of others who could have been where he was.

But the way certain folks enter into biblical stories does give writers a whole lot of license to construct wholly fictional lives around them. This is as good a film as any for that purpose.

53 out of 67 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

Outstanding religious spectacle with marvelous scenarios and excellent acting by large cast

ma-cortes25 March 2008

Barabbas (Anthony Quinn) , a thief and killer , is set free by Pontius Pilatus (Arthur Kennedy) in place of Jesus who is condemned to die crucified . Then , Barabbas suffering living anguish by this deed for the rest of his existence . But again he's detained and sent to horrible sulfur mines in Sicily , including terrible work conditions ; there he meets a kind Christian named Sahak (Vittorio Gassman) . Later on , he is brought to a school of gladiators run by cruel Torvald (a sadistic Jack Palance) . In Rome Barabbas meets other Christians (Ernest Borgnine) and Saint Peter (Harry Andrews) .

This epic film contains spectacular scenarios , lavish production and terrific performances . Second movie version of the renowned story based on popular novel by Lagerkvist (Nobel's prize) and previously adapted (1952) in Sweden by Alf Sjoberg . Interesting screenplay by Christopher Fry (who wrote ¨The Bible¨ by John Huston also produced by Dino De Laurentiis) . Top-notch performance by Anthony Quinn , he plays like his previous characters , a Zorba style, adding a little of Quaimodo , though sometimes overacting . Jesus is played by Roy Mangano , brother of Silvana Mangano , Laurentiis's wife . Extraordinary support cast , including prestigious players such as Arthur Kennedy , Katy Jurado , Ernest Borgnine , Arnaldo Foa , Norman Wooland , Douglas Fowley and even Sharon Tate was an extra in the amphitheater scene .

The overwhelming circus scenes were shot in the arena of Verona . Impressive sets produced in high budget , such as the scenarios of the mines and the Roman circus . Magnificently climatic gladiators fights , featured by hundreds of extras and stunning effects . The breathtaking gladiator combats is still one of the best screen fights today , along with ¨Gladiator¨ by Ridley Scott . The Golgota crucifixion scenes were actually shot in a sun eclipse and filmed in Niza . In fact , the solar eclipse that takes place during the crucifixion scene was the real thing, an event for which director Richard Fleischer delayed shooting in order to capture the ethereal nature of the phenomenon . Problems lingered on the set and at a cost of over ten million of dollars , it was one of the most expensive pictures of its time and took long time to finish . Colorful cinematography by Aldo Tonti and evocative musical score by Mario Nascimbene . Firstly , the producer De Laurentiis thought in charge direction to Federico Fellini , though he appointed to Richard Fleischer who realizes a quality film-making .

20 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

"The film that stopped the sun"

uds330 October 2003

How incredibly appropriate if not downright eerie that the sun should turn on a full eclipse during the filming of BARABBAS that was captured by the Technirama 70 cameras for the crucifixion scene.

Arguably the "forgotten epic" when talk of the 60's blockbusters brings inevitably mention of BEN HUR, KING OF KINGS, FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE, SPARTACUS, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA, GENGHIS KHAN, CLEOPATRA, SODOM AND GOMORRAH, etc. Many see in this film an individual depth and emotion, lacking in other such works. Quinn in fact brings (despite the poetic license taken with historical confirmation) to Barabbas, a portrayal of a man tortured by his past, his reason to still be alive and his destiny. From the claustrophobic escape from the sulphur mines to his gladiatorial deeds in the arena, Barrabas is a driven man of open-ended religious conviction. He embraces Christianity but does he understand it? He saw Christ die in his place and lived his life to find out why!

Palance whose face has been his career, was the ONLY choice as Torvald the head gladiator who lives only to kill! It was one of his best ever roles.

I saw this film in London at its premiere in 1962. It received luke-warm critical reception at the time but had a successful run in the West End of some six months or so. Has had far less screening on television and cable than other epics of its ilk which is a pity as it had a lot to offer the discriminating viewer.

70 out of 86 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

The man who could not die...

Nazi_Fighter_David6 September 2005

Warning: Spoilers

Through Barabbas, complex themes of faith, spirituality, violence, peace, morality, human dignity and cruelty were examined in the guise of a Biblical epic directed by a competent filmmaker of action pictures... His film vividly captured the panoply of Rome, the stultifying sulfur mines, the savagery of the Roman arena, the gladiatorial sadism, Nero's fire in Rome, and the persecution of Christians

Despite a lamentable weak script, the acting was often comfortable, and the action very entertaining

Anthony Quinn made his best as the confused man of violence, the common thief and the assassin...

Vittorio Gassman was good enough as the brave gladiator who stood on his faith...

Silvana Mangano was beautiful as Barabbas' former lover who knew that Jesus was, for her, the true substitute...

Jack Palance was, as always, great as the cruel and sadistic gladiator

22 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

The forgotten biblical film?.

hitchcockthelegend8 August 2008

Pontius Pilate asks the people of Jerusalem whom they want freed, Jesus Of Nazareth or Barrabas?, the former has been tagged as a King of the Jewish people, the latter a thief and a murderer, they choose Barrabas.

This is a pure work of fiction based around the 1950 Pär Lagerkvist novel of the same name. It has basically taken a passage in the New Testament and extended it to ask what became of the man who was freed instead of Christ? We open of course with the people choosing Barrabas, and the subsequent Crucifixion of Christ that is now scripture legend. This event doesn't at first seem to bother Barrabas, but as the story progresses it becomes clear that he himself has his own cross to bear. We follow him as he witnesses a barbaric stoning of someone close to him, this turns him bitter and a return to a life of crime is his only response. Once again arrested, he is sent to work in the sulphur mines, here he ages fast and hangs on desperately to his life and sanity. He forms a friendship with a fellow inmate and after both men get sent to gladiator school, he finds that the faith surrounding Christ looms large and bright in his life story.

Richard Fleischer directs, producer is Dino De Laurentus, Anthony Quinn takes the role of Barrabas, and Jack Palance and Ernest Borgnine add weight to the acting roll call. There is some very good work to be sampled here, Quinn manages to put a bit of sincerity into the lead role; for as Barrabas' perspective alters, Quinn convinces with a nice show of depth. Palance is decently nasty as Torvald, and although Ernest Borgnine is wasted as Lucius, he does however leave a very decent impression due to a good show of acting restraint. There are some lovely shots here as well, particularly around the sulphur mines sequences, whilst both the sets and costumes are suitably on the money.

Barrabas is a film that is rarely mentioned when talk of biblical epics arises, and the small amount of user comments here suggests it's largely forgotten. That's a shame because it holds up considerably better than the likes of The Robe. 7/10

8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

Overlong and dully paced at times, but still among the better biblical epics out there

TheLittleSongbird7 June 2015

Who cannot resist seeing a film with a cast like Anthony Quinn, Jack Palance, Ernest Borgnine and Harry Andrews? The cast and my general interest in biblical epic films were my reasons for seeing Barabbas. It's imperfect and could have been better, but there are also a lot of fantastic things. And when it comes to biblical epics, while not definitive or masterpiece status Barabbas is towards the better end of the spectrum.

Barabbas is very grand in scale visually. The sets and costumes are very lavish, the use of amber-orange gives the film a very soothing look and there's some truly breath-taking cinematography. The music score is incredibly powerful and the very meaning of stirringly epic. Also in terms of how it's orchestrated and recorded it's quite innovative with its experimental sounds. The script has its foibles but is a vast majority of the time intelligent and thoughtful, Richard Fleischer directs with a fine sense of period and an understanding to using the action and set pieces to their fullest potential and the story has many compelling moments. Especially true to this are the crucifixion set against a real eclipse of the fun, easily the most striking image of the film, and the climax in the arena, which is the most dramatically compelling and entertaining Barabbas gets.

Rachel's stoning(a heart-wrenching moment), the burning of Rome and the sulphur mines collapse are equally unforgettable scenes. The action is very exciting, so much so that it outweighs the film's dull stretches, and emotionally Barabbas is genuinely heartfelt and sincere. The cast is a uniformly talented one and all performances(despite the characters varying in how well-written they are) range from solid to great. Anthony Quinn portrays titular character Barabbas as a tortured, guilt-ridden soul and portrays this very movingly and with a great deal of intimacy. Not many actors succeed in bringing humanity to a criminal but Quinn manages to do that. Of the supporting cast, the standout is Jack Palance, whose performance as the snarling villain Torvald is an evil-incarnate powerhouse.

The film is let down chiefly by its pacing however. Not all of the time, mind, but the first half in particular is very stodgily paced and not always very eventful before properly coming to life in the stoning scene. There are a lot of references to Jesus which were dealt with rather heavy-handedly at times, some speeches ramble on a little too much and lose flow. 137 minutes is actually reasonably short compared to other biblical epics, but because there are some very draggy and not so eventful parts Barabbas to me did feel a little overlong in places. Barabbas is hardly the first biblical/historical epic to have these problems though, and others have done them much worse this said, and I'm usually tolerant of slow pacing and long lengths dependent on the execution of everything else.

And while a lot is done right in Barabbas, other areas are patchy. Also as gently sincere and pretty Silvana Mongano is, she has very little to do in a particularly clichéd and thinly sketched role in a film where only Barabbas has any proper development. To the film's credit, the idea of people being brought up and living life in tumultuous times is portrayed with much riveting realism, so while development is sketchy it is easy to get emotionally engaged and empathise with what the characters are going through.

Overall, overlong, at times heavy-handed in the script and with its dull spots, but with the wonderful production values, powerful music score, emotional resonance, some visually striking and dramatically compelling scenes and strong acting Barabbas still manages to be a good film and one of the better biblical epics. 7/10 Bethany Cox

7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

9/10

Among the best of all Biblical epics

MOscarbradley17 April 2006

Richard Fleischer was a good jobbing director but there were occasions when he seemed inspired. "The Vikings" is one of the great genre movies and "The Boston Strangler" is one of the best police procedural films ever made. This is very much in the same class and has much to commend it. It's biggest drawback is that the early scenes never quite shake off the enforced piety that engulfed Hollywood movies that centered on Christ. Is it any wonder that Monty Python lampooned such movies in their "Life of Brian"? On the other hand, coming as it does from a novel by Nobel prize-winning author Par Lagerkvist and scripted as it is by Christopher Fry, the film is more intellectually challenging than we have any right to expect, (for example Barabbas has a discussion with Lazarus on what it was like to have died and then to be raised from the dead), while at the same time not skimping on the spectacle, (the gladiatorial scenes are superb).

It begins with the freeing of Barabbas in the place of Jesus, then follows him on his own journey of redemption as he realizes that it was through Christ's death that he came to live. It's a theme, of course, as old as the Bible itself and as religious movies go it's a bit simplistic but it does work on a primitive, intellectually jarring level and it doesn't thrust it's religiosity down our throats. Barabbas' journey of discovery is long, slow and painfully questioning and is consequently quite moving.

No one in the large, international cast gets to rise above being a Biblical or gladiatorial cliché with the exception of Anthony Quinn in the title role. He is excellent and had yet to give way to the bombast of Zorba the Greek. Still, neither Quinn's performance nor the film have ever been given their due. Perhaps a movie about the man who lived so that Christ might die proved unpalatable. Nevertheless, it is certainly worth rediscovering.

35 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

You Won't Find Me Failing This Time

eliasmakaraig11 September 2021

Barabbas could be a good film as I see the efforts of its artists and production. First off, the effort to film the crucifixion during a solar eclipse is one of the most ingenious acts I have ever seen in the film industry. The sincere, almost spotless acting of Anthony Quinn is another great asset for this film, complimenting it is the.underrated performance of Vittorio Gassman as Sahak.

Some scenes positively stuns me to this day such as the gladiator scenes, mainly when Barabbas fights Torvald, the scary fire of Rome and the sulfur mine collapse which greatly depicts the claustrophobic atmosphere of the place. I also like that the ending calls out a specific part in the beginning of the film wherein Peter proves to Barabbas that he is truly became a fisher of men once they met for the third time in Rome.

Unfortunately, I still have issues in the pace of the story, specifically during the middle (the sulfur mine part). Unlike the Jerusalem part (where Barabbas seeks to find what happened to Jesus) and the Rome part (where Barabbas tries to win the gladiator match), the sulfur mine part loses any driving force that could naturally put an excitement in pushing the film forward, because Barabbas did not plan any escapes to the mine, not until he met Sahak.

But more concerning to the plot's pacing is post-production's subpar performance. The most laughable mediocrity of post-production is allowing the sound of whipping to be like a waving magic wand during the scourging of Jesus. In many parts of the film, the artists' voices are not synchronized with their mouths and it really turns me off.

In the beginning of my review, I commend the effort of waiting for the solar eclipse to reincarnate the crucifixion, yet, it will not diminish the fact that the crosses during this scene, in my opinion, looks like lame cardboard cutouts. Not to mention that during the second Pilate encounter of Barabbas, there is a brick wall that looks like a wooden plank painted without care. Lastly, the color grade of some of the parts of the film is too gloomy and muted that it looks so unnatural.

So to sum up, Barabbas has a potential to be a good film if only the post-production team had put great effort to make it more sensually satisfying.

3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

8/10

An intelligently subversive Biblical epic: SUBTEXT, people!

bonzerdad21 February 2005

Warning: Spoilers

I'll leave the plot summary to the others who've done it well, so far. But a plot summary doesn't begin to show how this one differs from the other Biblical epics of it's time. The difference lies in a script that wonderfully reflects the double-edged attitudes of Par Lagerkvist's powerfully brilliant short philosophical novel. Unimaginitive believers can see what the plot summaries indicate. But underneath it all, the adapter-screenwriter Christopher Fry, and the director, Richard Fleischer, manage to successfully walk an ironic tightrope , in which the "too-good" Christians and the ordinary sinful Barabbas are constantly contrasted during conversations long and short. Barabbas thinks Christianity all bosh, the world is not what Christians believe it is, but then why can't he die or be killed? As the King of Siam would say, the fact does make a puzzlement.

I must apologize for the following spoiler, but how anybody who is thinking at all can blithely assume that Barabbas is beyond doubt "saved" into the fold of the blessed is way beyond me. Even as a kid in the days of BARABBAS's first release I knew that something unusual was going on as soon as I heard Barabbas" final words from the cross: "Darkness...I give myself up to your keeping... It is Barabbas." I haven't left anything out; the dots just indicate pauses in Quinn's delivery. Prior to this line Barabbas has complained that he can't tell whether it is night or day and asks what time it is and remembers that it was at the sixth hour that....

I love this film as wonderful dramatic exploration of the modern dilemma of faith. I expect I'm biased in loving it because it helped develop my abiding interest in philosophy; But I don't think that that bias has pushed me into a mistake when I call BARABBAS one of the most thoughtful and intelligent movies of its time, in spite of its being a sword and sandal epic.

29 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

It wasn't for nothing that Christ died. Mankind isn't nothing. In His eyes, each individual man is the whole world.

lastliberal-853-25370824 April 2011

Now if the makers of Gladiator would have watched this film, they would have known how to build an arena that was fascinating, with lions and fiery lakes for the losers. They even had their own version of rodeo clowns.

But, this is not just a gladiator story, but a story about a man's redemption. Barabbas (Anthony Quinn) stands in for all men who are thrashing about with doubts and half-beliefs.

Based upon a Nobel prize winning novel by Pär Lagerkvist, with screen play by Christopher Fry, considered the 20th Century Shakespeare, this is a story for the ages. Sure, there is no evidence for this, as there is no evidence that Barrabas even existed; it is just one man's imagination, but it makes for a good story.

Barrabas does win his freedom in the arena against an over-the-top Jack Palance as Torvald, while Sahak (Vittorio Gassman)gives his life rather than deny his God. Lucius, (Ernest Borgnine) rejects Barrabas for killing to gain his freedom and then trying to find God.

But, in the end, he makes a decision.

2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

8/10

Barabbas (1961) ***

JoeKarlosi15 April 2007

This is a captivating but fictionalized story about what may have happened in the aftermath of the hardened criminal Barabbas being released to freedom in place of Jesus Christ, who was the one chosen by the people to be crucified in his place. As the thieving and murderous Barabbas, Anthony Quinn is perfectly cast for the part.

Barabbas becomes a free man only temporarily, as it's not long before his old ways get him imprisoned again, landing him twenty years hard labor in the deadly sulphur mines. He is consistently tormented by repressed guilt and confusion for being freed in the place of Jesus and when he meets up with a Christian prisoner at a time where it's considered blasphemous to hold such beliefs, Barabbas begins to tread on the path of acceptance of his part in history and his discovery of Christianity. Along his journey to self-realization, Barabbas becomes a gladiator who must come face to face with the most sadistic warrior of all, the dreaded Torvald (a deliciously sinister performance by Jack Palance) as they confront each other in the arena in a life-and-death duel.

My favorite sequence in the film is one which rarely gets mentioned. It involves a former love of Barabbas, a woman named Rachel (Silvana Mangano) who had begun to follow Jesus during the period where Barabbas was incarcerated. She is now a holy disciple and prophet for Christ, and when the citizens catch her spreading his word, they call for her to be stoned to death. Rachel's brave plight as she is lead down into a great pit and sits solemnly still as hundreds of sinners hurl their rocks at her face from above, is a truly powerful scene. Her faith carries her through the horrifying ordeal, and she reaches confidently out for the hand of Christ, oblivious amidst the flying stones. Just a beautiful moment. *** out of ****

12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

"Jesus of Nazareth was killed instead of me! There must have been a reason!"

moonspinner5530 April 2011

Murkily-developed Biblical epic is long though not lumbering. Anthony Quinn goes through a grueling series of events as Barabbas, a hard-drinking thief and womanizer in Jerusalem who was spared death when Jesus Christ was chosen to take his place on the cross. Soon convicted on other charges, bad-tempered Barabbas slaved for decades in the hellish sulfur mines before being thrown into the gladiator arena, still spiritually torn over his religious vocation. Based on the Nobel-Prize winning novel by Pär Lagerkvist, this (rather melodramatic) 'expansion' from the Gospel of Mark is robotic instead of robust. Still, the momentum here for each new chapter in Barabbas' life is presented with tacky grandeur, and the picture manages to sweep the audience up in a theatrical fervor which is entertaining, if gaudy. **1/2 from ****

2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

5/10

Anthony Quinn's performance is reason enough to watch it

filipemanuelneto5 June 2017

This film is perhaps one of the least known of Hollywood's extensive list of biblical background epics. After leaving the theaters, it was being forgotten due to the little interest of the television channels. I think this lack of interest is due to three factors: the lack of a star cast (Anthony Quinn is the biggest name here), the focus on a secondary biblical character and the invention of a fictional storyline around him. Thus, the plot relates the life and walk of conversion of Barabbas, after having been liberated by acclamation of the Jews, in the events that preceded the crucifixion. Quinn is an excellent actor and manages to endow his character with enormous dramatic and psychological depth. Its worth watching it just for his performance. Vittorio Gassman is equally great thanks to his extraordinary work as Sahek, a convicted Christian who helps Barabbas to overcome his spiritual crisis. Okay, sets and costumes are a far cry from the quality and priceyness of "Quo Vadis" or "Ben Hur", but still satisfy and give the film a classic epic scent. The soundtrack is ordinary.

5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

"Give me Barabbas!"

mikedonovan19 April 2002

BARABBAS rocks. We saw it at the drive-in in the early 60's and the whole family loved it, all nine of us. I'm not always enamored with Anthony Quinn. Sometimes he seems conceited. But as Barabbas he is brilliantly humble, yet powerful. This is by far, his best movie ever. His faces say a thousand words a thousand times. It's as though he was transformed and really became the character, not played it. He is stoic and disturbed, tortured by the crisis within his soul. Barabbas is the man the crowd chose over Christ and this is a fictionalized account of his life after Christ was crucified. Jack Palance gives the second greatest performance of his life as the man who trains, and sometimes kills, gladiators. That evil laugh. That face. What corner of hell gave birth to this man? It's almost as good as his Jack Wilson gunfighter role in Shane. Palance is so mean in Barabbas that all sorts of pacifists would gladly kill him if they had the chance. There are a couple of slow spots but the sets are fantastic and the story is great.

How did Jack Palance sleep at night?

34 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

big old Hollywood production

SnoopyStyle4 April 2015

Pontius Pilate releases the violent criminal Barabbas (Anthony Quinn) instead of Jesus. Barabbas returns to his drunken friends to find his lover Rachel (Silvana Mangano) has become one of Jesus' follower. He goes blind for awhile as Jesus is crucified. Rachel gets stoned to death for blasphemy. Barabbas is arrested again for robbing a temple caravan but Pilate tells him that he is not allowed to sentence him to death again. Instead he is sentenced to the sulfur mines in Sicily. He is chained to a Christian Sahak but he still refuses to believe in Christ. After many years, they are brought to Rome and become gladiators under the famous champion Torvald (Jack Palance).

Nobody can claim that the film went cheap on the production. This is a big scale movie of Old Hollywood. The acting is very broad at times. I really didn't like the constant referencing to Jesus in the first half. It becomes too much when he meets Lazarus and the Disciples. Rachel and Sahak are much better conduits for the message. I do like the sulfur mines as a substitute for hell. I would have liked him to find salvation down in the mines. It would be poetic and make the movie shorter.

3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

Nicely Done

onepotato24 December 2010

Warning: Spoilers

This movie was a pleasant surprise. I'm an atheist but if you grant the story whatever you grant other stories you can take it as it is; a better than average narrative. Choosing Barrabas as the protagonist allows this movie to avoid the simpleton, heraldic treatment of good Christians vs. bad pagans. Though it certainly falters here and there. As with all Biblical epics the movie does have one or two Christian dullards who are mad at the Romans for killing Christ. Well yes, and if you're a believer, his death is the foundation of your religion and man's salvation. How could you not understand something so fundamental? How could you miss the point so completely? Well... because people can't reason to save their lives.

Barrabas takes forever to figure it all out. He is a true dullard, as his character would be. And Anthony Quinn keeps his performance in check (No hamming). The movie is shot beautifully/naturally, without a lot of arid prettiness to let your mind stray from the point. In the end, it is admirably true to grave matters of theology. Rather than vanquish some two dimensional baddie (which means zero in the grand scheme of things) the real finish of this movie has to do with the condition of Barrabas' tortured, oblivious soul. As I viewed the ending I was quite surprised, since as I watched I was thinking, "ten to one Hollywood and the writers miss the point and off some irrelevant villain." You will not be whistling a happy tune, and ordering a pizza after the final images.

3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

A Hollywood Story

whpratt110 April 2007

This was a very entertaining film about the man who was a crook and obtained his freedom when Jesus Christ was crucified on the cross. Anthony Quinn, (Barabbas) gave an outstanding performance and the role suited him perfectly. The story showed how Barabbas suffered greatly after his freedom and wound up in salt mines doing the worst kind of work and then having to fight as a gladiator against a powerful threat, Jack Palance, (Tovald) who gave an outstanding supporting role. This is a good film to show around the Easter season, however, this is pure fiction about the life of Barabbas and Hollywood present a good film along with the great actor Anthony Quinn.

4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

10/10

An Intelligent, Sane, Thoughtful, Moving Film: Mel Gibson Had Nothing To Do With It

tonstant viewer31 October 2004

This is a first-class, reverent film that doesn't fall into Hallmark-card empty kitsch on one hand, or Mel Gibson's sado-masochistic porn on the other. This movie does not insult the subject-matter or the audience, and that's rarer than we might like.

Special credit goes to Aldo Tonti's Rembrandt lighting, consistently a joy. Mario Nascimbene's musical score rises above his usual brutality to real eloquence. The acting is without weakness, Quinn, Borgnine, Jurado and Andrews putting aside their sometimes numbing predictability for this special occasion. Richard Fleischer's direction is punchy without being vulgar, serious but not ponderous.

There are some awful religious films out there. This is thankfully not one of them. It's definitely worth the viewing for Christians and non-Christians alike.

41 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

7/10

Couldn't Recapture the Book

Hitchcoc19 June 2014

I, of all people, know that it is unfair to compare a movie to a book. Since this film was viewed as an extension of a book study, it's hard not to do so. So I will try to be fair. I believe that Par Lagerqvist's work has an overwhelming existentialist vent to it. Barrabas witnesses the Crucifixion. He can do this because he has been spared his life due to the fact that once a year, a prisoner can be pardoned. Of course, the people call for him and reject Christ. All this follows the plot and Barabbas find himself back in his old ways. He is a subversive, but really all about himself. The book was written in 1951 by a man who had rejected Christianity. The problem with the movie is that it sucks so much humanity out of its main character. The subtle moments that show he is on a course of self discovery, don't, for me, match the book's character. I also found the whole gladiator thing, which never appears in the book, to be strictly fodder for the lowest common denominator. It is probably because this was competing with the other Biblical epics of that time. I will give Jack Palance credit. He is about as mean spirited as anyone ever in film, a true psychotic presence with his almost maniacal grin. I think at that point the subtleties went out the window. It's not a terrible movie (it's quite decent in its own way), but I think with a director and some writers that could have embraced the novel a bit more (and kept the original characters as they are described) and not bowed to popular culture, it would have been much better.

3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

10/10

piece of art - a classic

alpojohn2 May 2002

The struggle in our hearts between good and evil, the ways of man in general, various historical elements, the values of christianity, all these given in a truly beautiful movie. Anthony Quinn shows once more that one must born to be an actor of his magnitude. The other actors are very convincing, the scenery is great and so is the sound track. There is also enough food for thought in this film because of its nature, and it can create intense emotions. SPLENDID

15 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

Welease Bawabbas!

JamesHitchcock25 April 2014

Warning: Spoilers

The success of films like "The Robe" (based on a novel by Lloyd Douglas) and "Quo Vadis?" (based on a novel by Henryk Sienkiewicz) had Hollywood producers scouring the libraries and the bookshops for other novels about the life of Christ and the early Church that could be turned into quasi-Biblical epics. Lew Wallace's "Ben-Hur" must have seemed a natural for this treatment, and the resulting film is one of the greatest epics ever made, but there were some more obscure entries in the cycle such as the eccentric "The Silver Chalice".

"Barabbas" was based on a novel by the Swedish writer Pär Lagerkvist, a winner of the Nobel Prize for literature. The gospels do not tell us very much about Barabbas, the man released by Pontius Pilate in preference to Jesus, except that he was a criminal of some sort. The four evangelists cannot even agree on the nature of his crimes; Mark and Luke accuse him of rebellion and murder, John of robbery, while Matthew simply calls him a "notorious prisoner". In Lagerkvist's account he resumes his criminal career after his release, is recaptured and condemned to work as a slave in the sulphur mines of Sicily, and later becomes a gladiator. (And what Roman epic would be complete without gladiators?)

When Monty Python's controversial "Life of Brian" was attacked for allegedly ridiculing Christianity, the Pythons claimed that their satire was not aimed at Christ's teaching but at grandiose, excessively reverential religious epics. Their critics may have dismissed this claim as disingenuous, but "Barabbas" strikes me as precisely the sort of film the Pythons were sending up. The script was written by the then-famous dramatist Christopher Fry and although it is not in verse, unlike most of Fry's stage plays, the dialogue often seems heavy and ponderous. As a practising Pythonist of long standing I kept hearing echoes of "Brian" throughout; during the release scene I was expecting the crowd to shout "Welease Bawabbas! He's a wobber and a wapist!" When Barabbas' ex- girlfriend Rachel, who has become a Christian, is stoned to death for blasphemy, I wondered if she had committed the sin of remarking "That piece of fish is good enough for Jehovah!"

And yet, despite its tendency to slide into unintentional self-parody, this is not altogether a bad film. It was directed by Richard Fleischer, a director whose films varied in quality but who could generally come up with something original. He worked in virtually every movie genre known to Hollywood, and when he made two films in the same genre was careful not to repeat himself. Thus his two science-fiction films, the steampunk "20,000 Leagues under the Sea" and the psychedelic "Fantastic Voyage" are nothing like one another, and his "The Girl in the Red Velvet Swing" and "10, Rillington Place" are about as dissimilar as it is possible for two based-on-fact historical crime dramas to be.

Fleischer had made a previous epic, "The Vikings", but this mediaeval adventure story is very different to "Barabbas". Many epics were noted for their brilliant colour- by the fifties a black-and-white epic was virtually unthinkable- but "Barabbas" is sombre in tone with dull, muted colours. It does, however, include moments of spectacle, including a splendid duel in the arena and a crucifixion scene shot during a real eclipse of the sun.

The film's other great strength is the performance of Anthony Quinn in the title role. As conceived by Lagerkvist, Barabbas is a man troubled by the implications of his unexpected reprieve from death. He recognises Christ as somebody special but does not, except at the very end of the film, fully accept the truth of Christianity, even though he is befriended by a Christian prisoner while in the mines. Quinn plays the role with a blazing sincerity which sets him apart from many leading men in films of this nature; Paul Newman, for example, gave one of his worst performances in "The Silver Chalice", and Richard Burton is hardly at his best in "The Robe". Jack Palance, who was about the only watchable thing about "The Silver Chalice", is also good here as the arrogant and sadistic gladiator Torvald who fights Barabbas in the arena. Torvald fights from a chariot, in a scene obviously influenced by the chariot race in "Ben-Hur".

(Incidentally, I wonder why Lagerkvist gave the common Scandinavian Christian name "Torvald" to one of his characters; this struck me as the equivalent of a British novelist calling a Roman gladiator "Bill" or "Harry". Admittedly, the name, which incorporates that of the pagan god Thor, could have been used in pre-Christian times, but it is unlikely that someone from Scandinavia, to the Romans a little-known land far outside their empire, could have made his way to Rome).

"Barabbas" is not the best-known of the quasi- Biblical epics, although it has been kept in the public eye by occasional showings over the Easter holidays. It cannot compare in quality with something like "Ben- Hur", but Quinn's acting and Fleischer's directorial touches give it a certain quality which lifts it above the likes of the ludicrous "Silver Chalice". 6/10

2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

8/10

Well done fantasy based on a novel

marcin_kukuczka13 June 2004

This film is not purely a Hollywood production since this was made in cooperation with the Italian producers. Nevertheless, it can be categorized to all classical movies, like CLEOPATRA, QUO VADIS, BEN HUR, or SPARTACUS. What is there that makes this film so similar?

It is a fantasy faithful to history. These two worlds, the historical and the fictitious one, integrate together. The story of Barabbas is strongly linked to the times of the 1st century, the beginnings of the Christian faith and the cruel reign of Caesars, esp. Nero. Par Lagerkvist, the author of the novel BARABBAS, which got the Noble Prize in 1951, showed Barabbas as someone who does not believe, but the light of Christ is present in his soul from the moment he was set free and Jesus sentenced to be crucified. The spiritual content of the movie cannot be skipped. Barabbas experiences the struggle within his heart, though he mocks Nazarenes in the beginning. "Love one another" somehow unconsciously rings in his mind from the moment of Christ's death (the imagery of Jesus's crucifixion is one of the most powerful I have ever seen on screen). This is showed beautifully and faithfully to the book by Richard Fleischer in the movie.

Another aspect that makes the film similar to great, classical productions are the monumental scenes, particularly the arena moments. Lions, gladiators fighting on arena remind me of SPARTACUS (1960), THE SIGN OF THE CROSS (1932) or DEMETRIUS AND THE GLADIATORS (1954). Barabbas also fights as a gladiator with the bravest man of Rome, Torvald (Jack Palance), and wins...

And the cast... Great Anthony Quinn as Barabbas is very memorable. He beautifully presents his change of heart from a bad guy to the Christian. Silvana Mangano also does a good job as Rachel whose meeting with Christ changed her life forever; Vittorio Gassman gives a memorable performance as a Christian, Sahak, whose sole aim in life is following his Master to martyrdom; and Jack Palance is absolutely gorgeous as a cruel, "unconquered" Torvald.

I like this movie. It is a profound film, with a wonderful message. Even if you are not much aware of Christ, He is within you. The story of Barabbas, if true or not, also proves the fact that everything in our lives has a MEANING! NOTHING IS MEANINGLESS! Good movie! 8/10

24 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

6/10

The struggle with sin, guilt, redemption, people, belief, suffering and God

Wuchakk14 March 2014

RELEASED IN 1961 and directed by Richard Fleischer, "Barabbas" is an Italian sword & sandal epic that begins where more popular biblical epics leave off, like "Ben-Hur," "King of Kings" and "The Passion of the Christ."

THE STORY: Anthony Quinn plays the titular character, a murderous lout and insurrectionist condemned to die at the time of the trial of Christ. Barabbas' first name was Jesus, so Roman governor Pilate was essentially asking the crowd to choose between Jesus Barabbas and Jesus Christ, the guilty or the innocent, to be put to death or set free. They of course choose to condemn the innocent so Barabbas is set free. Throughout the rest of his life Barabbas is haunted by Christ's sacrifice and struggles with guilt over his unmerited salvation. His ex-girlfriend suffers greatly for her Christian beliefs, he spends years as a slave in the notorious sulfur mines and also experiences the life of a gladiator. His life is a constant struggle -- with himself, with others, with his beliefs, with his various predicaments and mostly with God Himself.

No one knows what really happened to Barabbas after he was set free; this is a fictional account based on the novel by Par Larverkvist.

WHAT WORKS: The picture was filmed entirely in Italy, including Sicily, and the locations & sets are great and very authentic-looking. The Colosseum scenes were filmed at real Italian amphitheaters, so these sequences have a genuine feel as opposed to the fake-looking CGI Colosseum scenes in "Gladiator" (2000). The stoning scene is heart-wrenching. This is the first and only film I've ever seen this depicted and it shows what a real-life stoning was like. All I can say is: It's not pretty.

Silvana Mangano plays Barabbas' ex-girlfriend Rachel. Unfortunately her natural beauty is played down here. Be sure to catch Silvana in Kirk Douglas' "Ulysses" (1954) where she plays both Penelope and the witch/siren Circe. Silvana's beauty is absolutely captivating in "Ulysses," which has more pizazz than "The Odyssey" (1997), but both films have their strengths.

The sulfur mine sequences have a realistic feel. So much so it may occur to you that, no matter how bad you have it, at least you're not a slave in a sulfur mine.

Jack Palance plays the lead gladiator. He lives for one purpose only: to entertain spectators by killing people in the arena. He thrives on the accolades he receives. What will happen when Barabbas faces him in a duel to the death? The gladiatorial scenes are pretty much on a par with similar scenes in "Spartacus" and "Ben-Hur" (although, of course, nothing can ever top the spectacular chariot race).

Ernest Borgnine is also on hand in a small role. You can never go wrong with Borgnine.

The score by Mario Nascimbene is solemn and potent.

WHAT DOESN'T WORK: The picture starts off slowly and doesn't really capture your full attention until the stoning sequence, which is a full 40 minutes into the story. In other words, be prepared to persevere for about 45 minutes or so. At the 50-minute mark the mine scenes start and the story finally becomes compelling (the film runs 2 hours and 17 minutes).

FYI: The Almighty (apparently) provided an actual total solar eclipse February 15, 1961 to enhance the eerie scenes of darkness, which mysteriously fell across the land after Jesus' crucifixion. The score during this scene is simple, almost non-existent, but very ominous.

FINAL ANALYSIS: "Barabbas" successfully depicts every man or woman's struggle with sin, guilt, redemption, suffering and the search for ultimate reality or truth. This is not a fun, adventurous or action-packed film, although there's some good action in the gladiatorial scenes. Barabbas' journey is torturous at best, but worthwhile if you're in the proper brooding mood for such a picture.

COMPARISON: Although "Barabbas" isn't as great as other biblical epics like "Ben-Hur" or "The Ten Commandments" or sword & sandal epics like "Troy," it's better than the outrageously melodramatic "The Robe" (a horrible film IMHO) and the boring "The Greatest Story Ever Told" (how about "The Dullest Film Ever Made"?). It's roughly on par with films like "Samson and Delilah," "King of Kings" and "Spartacus," even though I give "Samson" and "Spartacus" the edge.

GRADE: B-

2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

4/10

Boreabbas.

BA_Harrison17 April 2015

Asked which condemned man they wish to set free, the people of Jerusalem vote for thief Barabbas (Anthony Quinn), leaving Jesus of Nazareth to be crucified. Barabbas returns to his life of crime, is arrested and sent to the sulphur mines, and eventually becomes a gladiator, but slowly begins to believe that Jesus might have been someone very special and probably deserved to live more than he did. Needless to say, he feels a bit guilty.

Several years back I posted on IMDb's "I Need To Know' board, asking whether anyone could identify a film featuring a scene set in a mine where the main character could be seen 'riding' large containers of molten metal transported by a pulley system. Someone suggested 'Barabbas'. Being a fan of sword & sandal/epic biblical adventures, I bought the film on DVD, thinking 'What have I got to lose?'.

Now I know: time and money.

Not only is this NOT the film I was looking for, but it's incredibly dull as well. Made just two years after William Wyler's multiple Oscar winning blockbuster Ben-Hur, Barabbas clearly hopes to emulate that film's success with an impressive cast, lavish production values and wonderful cinematography, but fails thanks to a dreadfully miscast lead in Anthony Quinn (who looks old and unfit), a ponderous, heavy-handed script which labours the religious angle, a dreary pace and a lack of decent action.

Ben-Hur might also have been guilty of over-doing the melodrama at times, but it had Charlton Heston in his prime, a compelling story, and—most importantly—that chariot race (the pathetic gladiator fights in Barabbas simply cannot compare, despite Jack Palance making for a great 'boo hiss' baddie).

3.5 out of 10, generously rounded up to 4 for the brutal stoning of Barabbas's ex-lover Rachel (Silvana Mangano) and for the camel that keeps shaking its head while making funny noises.

8 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

User Reviews

See also

Opinion

Details

Storyline

Did You Know?

Photo & Video

Related Items

User Lists

Recently Viewed