It is the year 33 of the Vulgar Era. The Emperor Tiberius is troubled by strange phenomena, an earthquake and the sky turning black as an eclipse. His astrologers give him fair warning their omens indicate that the world is in the throes of a great upheaval and that old gods have been annihilated. A new kingdom is about to rise in the East. The Emperor calls Tito Valerio Tauro, the most prominent investigator in Rome, back from his exile. He was ostracized years earlier because he had discovered too much regarding the death of the great Emperor Augustus, the predecessor of Tiberius. Tiberius entrusts Tauro with a mission that will require all his talent should he conduct it successfully, his good name will be completely restored. He must discover the truth regarding the death sentence of a poor Judean rabbi. His name is Jesus of Nazareth and they say he has resurrected from the dead. Tiberius is convinced that it has something to do with the prophecies and the celestial omens that shook the world some months earlier. Tauro is a skeptic and the only thing he believes in is reason, but a series of mysteries that will put his intelligence to the test awaits him in Judea. Nothing is as it seems in Jerusalem. Governor Pilate is an ambitious man, both discredited and treacherous, who weaves his way among the opposing Pharisee and Zealot factions. During his inquiry, Tauro comes face-to-face with individuals he has never met before Saul of Tarsus, a valiant defender of Mosaic tradition and an unshakable prosecutor of Christians the mysterious and nearly insane Judas of Iscariot, who is presumably one of the disciples of Jesus of Nazareth and the alleged leader of the Christians, a poor fisherman named Simon Peter. They are humble and powerful men, belonging to one faction or the other, but who share one obsession an idea of faith that the Roman eyes of Tauro seems to be simply incomprehensible and quite dangerous. He withstands this idea with all his might. He believes that Jesus is only a quack, some kind of impostor and his presumed resurrection must be a public hoax staged in order to exploit the credulousness of the poor lot, the first to be converted to the Christian sect, the followers of Jesus, nearly all of them belonging to the lowest social levels of society fishermen, farmers, even slaves - all of them treated as free men. And the same holds true, more surprisingly yet, for women - equal to men in the eyes of the Christian God. One of these women who believe in Jesus will finally offer Tauro the key to understanding the mystery of Jesus of Nasareths death and conclude the mission that the Emperor has entrusted him with. Her name is Tabitha. She is not yet twenty years old and she will unveil the mystery of love to the cleverest and most disenchanted Roman investigator.
|The Final Inquiry Movie(DivX)||Resolution: 672x368 px||Total Size: 1405 Mb|
|The Final Inquiry Movie(iPod)||Resolution: 480x256 px||Total Size: 372 Mb||
We have taken some photos of "The Final Inquiry". They represent actual movie quality.
One of the best movies I have ever seen... Just love it.. The story is intriguing..( A Roman Tribune seeking the factual truth about Jesus and finding His real truth...Love)...Extremely fascinating watching Liotti portray the feelings of the character on his face..Never seen that before..He is very suttle and definately in command of his performance..Absolutely excellent...Enjoy...
This review is from: The Final Inquiry (DVD) This is the only movie I have seen where it deals with what happened in that part of the world (if not in the whole world) during and after Jesus' death and resurrection. The Roman Emperor sends a Roman soldier to find out what happened to the body of Jesus Christ. What the soldier finds is a mystery.
The original movie, made in 1986 and starring Keith Carradine andHarvey Keitel, is a little-known gem of an intellectual thriller, witha plot that takes numerous unexpected twists.This "remake" (hardly that, since the title, basic premise, and name ofthe lead character are all that remain) is essentially a Sunday schoolmovie made by hacks, full of pious posturing. It's pretty to look at,but utterly lacking in suspense, narrative drive, good acting, or justabout anything else you might desire in a movie.I am beginning to think that any movie with Valerio Massimo Manfredi'sname in the credits is going to be very, very bad.
It had an interesting storyline, and it was never really boring. But you could tell that it lacked polish in many areas; for example, the "earthquake" in the opening sequence where the trees stood still and all it really looked like was someone was shaking the camera while people pretended to stagger around. Some of the dialog was strange too and seemed unpolished. However, it was still enjoyable and had a solid storyline.
This review is from: The Final Inquiry (Amazon Instant Video) This film was powered by the cast of the movie. If it weren't for the superb acting ability of Daniele Lioti I would have rated this at best a 3 star movie. The premise of the movie is that a Roman tribune and his slave (Dolph Lungran) are sent by Caesar to investigate the death and resurrection of a "Jesus of Nazareth".
I'll try to simply enumerate what I thought made this movie interesting and different in its approach from many, many others that have tried to present different parts of the story of Jesus Christ. I'll try to minimize spoilers as much as possible, because my purpose is not to give you my spin on the movie, with blow-by-blow descriptions, but rather to show you what's different and interesting about it.It's different from anything else I've seen in this subject area because it starts out almost like a detective story, with a trusted Roman Commander and Tribune being sent from the battlefields of Germania over to Judea, where he has no idea of what's been going on. He's been sent expressly by the Roman Emperor Tiberius to investigate whether or not a Jewish martyr named Jesus resurrected himself after being crucified to death, or not. Pontius Pilate, Saul of Tarsus (who would later become the Apostle Paul), and the High Priest of the Sandedrin, go to great lengths to convince the Tribune that the whole thing is a farce and a fraud. But the Tribune presses his investigation, and when presented with a corpse that Pilate has said is that of Jesus, the Tribune conducts his own postmortem analysis, concluding that it could not have been that of a man who had been killed by crucifixion, because the physical evidence for that conclusion simply was not there. Then, in a clever piÃ¨ce de rÃ©sistance, Pilate and the High Priest put on a very convincing demonstration to disprove the report of Lazarus being raised from the dead, extrapolating the assumption of an identical fraud to the resurrection of Jesus. This may sound like an interesting plot to you, but there are some disappointments and distractions. The acting and screenplay could have been better, and the directing could have been quite a bit better, too. There was really a lot of talent in this movie... particularly Max von Sydow, F. Murray Abraham, and Hristo Shopov (as Pilate, very much as he played the identical role in Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ"). But the performances lacked the polish and finesse of "Gladiator", which Giulio Base, the Director of this movie, seemed intent on copying style, form, and mood from. Even the stylistic use of having sad, mysterious music in the soundtrack, much like "Gladiator", is used in "Final Inquiry", punctuated by a woman singing in an elegiac, acapella echoing style. I would agree with others who have said that Dolph Lundgren gave a surprisingly strong performance that contributed to the movie. But by contrast, I couldn't really appeciate the director's rendition of the Caligula character, which was almost funny to watch because it was such a stereotype, again attempting to recall "Gladiator" scenes involving Commodus and Marcus Aurelius. So, did I enjoy the movie -- yes, to a degree. I could have enjoyed it a lot more if a more capable person had directed it, and if the focus could have stayed more on the track of an engaging detective story rather than with so much emphasis on the subplots that emerged during the latter half of the movie. You have seen much worse, but you have probably seen better also. With all it had going for it, this movie could have been exceptional, like the "Gladiator" movie the Director was so obviously intent on borrowing so much from....
This review is from: The Final Inquiry (DVD) This film reminds the viewer of the book of Acts, but it is NOT Biblically accurate if that's what you're looking for. This is definitely a creative adaptation.It does portray healing and the miraculous.It comes from a Catholic background which becomes apparent with some of the imagery and choices of names (Tabitha) for example for the woman. We are not at all Catholic but still find the movie a nice addition to our collection.
I saw a film a couple of years ago with the same premise. Not being made by Christians it was less than fulfilling spiritually. While this film was made from a genuine Christian slant, the production elements were less than satisfactory. This is like a second-rate THE ROBE. In fact there are many similarities from a Roman Tribune looking for truth to his trusty sidekick and Peter healing a woman. Of course that film had Richard Burton...this one doesn't. I couldn't believe F. Murray Abraham's performance. This guy won an Oscar?!!? And Dolph Lundgren...who knows? His dialogue was so stilted, I started longing for the atrocious dialogue of the lastest STAR WARS movies, but that isn't really his fault. And I had to put my foot down with the Caligula homage to GLADIATOR. First of all we never hear about Caligula until the very end and he comes in looking like an actor from a Silent Film...blaring eyes and overdone body movements...reminded me of Gloria Swanson in SUNSET BLVD.I will say this. The costumes were spectacular. And I really liked the flashbacks with Jesus. And I also liked the guy playing Peter. I've never seen him played just that way and I really liked it. I also liked the tying together of Saul and Stephen. Very nice idea.This was a good idea for a film but like most Christian films, it falls short of the mark. It's a shame because I personally think films about God deserve the VERY BEST. Maybe someday Hollywood will catch on. Hey Hollywood, there's plenty of Christians that will see these movies if you make them right or didn't you hear about the millions PASSION OF THE CHRIST made. I know you're all about money and frankly we're willing to part with it...we just want some quality with our spirituality. Not too much to ask, is it?
If you enjoy Biblical film, you should enjoy this and add it to yourcollection. I'm not sorry I purchased it. Lundgren & Liotti arefabulous to look at and Monica Cruz is no slouch either (she looks justlike her sister, Penelope).The story-line is great. I wonder where the "Goofs" section is under"Fun Stuff" on IMDb, as this film was not devoid of them. For example,the rolling away of the massive stone at the tomb of Lazarus. It wasdone by one guy while another stood with a piece of lumber to assist byprying it but really did nothing, which would not have been possible.Some of the fight scenes just looked very badly done. There was a kissscene wherein saliva strung from one person to another that would havebeen much more watchable had that been edited out. Finally, at the end,the terrain was striped by tire tracks and what looked like a radiotower on a mountain top.
This review is from: The Final Inquiry (DVD) Shipper did a great job. Product arrived in a reasonable time and was in great shape. The movie, however, was a real stinker. Of course, that's not the sellers fault.
I saw the brilliant original by Damiano Damiani(http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093255/) about twenty years ago. This isnot a remake. Compared to the original screenplay, the story in thisfilm is a joke in the best tradition of Hollywood, and it utterly doesnot follow the original plot.This is a propaganda movie, a failed copy of the masterpiece by DamianoDamiani and a poor attempt to substitute real world values by thin airspeculation and candy, pure Hollywood style. Nevertheless the movie hasa value of its own, I have never seen Dolf Lundgren in a role like theone he took in this movie, and I could say that Monica Cruz play is notworse than her sister's, not to mention that Monica is somehow prettierthan Penelope. It is a shame that Ornella Mutti did not participate inthe original by her compatriot Damiano Damiani.
This review is from: The Final Inquiry (DVD) Dolph Lundgren is my favorite actor, but my goodness, even he could not make this film good. Dolph plays a barbarian who has a secondary role at best. The dialogue was abysmal. This was the first time I've ever seen a movie where I actually realized that they were using fake props. This was particularly evident during a stoning scene. It was obvious that the person was being hit with foam rocks. I'm also pretty sure the swords during a fight scene were made out of cardboard. Dolph needs to be the lead in any movie he's in. It doesn't work otherwise, except in Rocky IV. The fact that his character didn't even have any personality didn't help either. The one redeeming thing about this movie is that a Christian will find the story/ message good. This does give a positive and uplifting message about Jesus. But even for a Dolph Lundgren film, it has very little merit otherwise.
Good biblical films are hard to find. Most of them were made several decades ago. And even today we have splendid big-screen films like The Nativity Story and The Passion of the Christ. But it's difficult to find decent small-screen religious movies.The Final Inquiry is an earnest Christian film loosely based on the story of Tabitha (Acts 9:36-42) in the Bible. The ailing Roman emperor Tiberius (Max von Sydow) sends the soldier Titus Valerius Taurus (Daniele Liotti) to investigate the delicate issue of the missing body of an executed Galilean rabbi. Taurus is thwarted at every turn by wily Pontius Pilate (Hristo Shopov, who played the same role in The Passion of the Christ).To make matters worse for the harried Taurus, he finds himself falling in love with a lovely Jewish maiden named Tabitha (Monica Cruz). Tabitha has problems of her own: her mother is stoned to death for allegedly having an affair with a Roman, her father wants to marry her off to an old man, and on top of that she has to hide her new Christian faith. A romance between the two would be improbable, to say the least.Cruz and Liotti manage to make such a romance not only probable but endearing. Tabitha practically glows, and Taurus is gallant and humorous, far more than hunky Roman eye candy. Several of the supporting characters are equally interesting, particularly Pilate, Taurus' German slave Brixas (Dolph Lundgren), and Tabitha's father (F. Murray Abraham).Unfortunately, some of the other characters are cheesy and one-dimensional. This is a particular problem with the Jewish authorities. I seriously doubt any anti-Semitism was intended, but the actors paint their characters with such broad brushes that they come off as rather cartoonish. To be fair, some of this probably has to do with the voices dubbed over most of the Italian actors' voices, presumably to make them easier to understand. Why not just hire actors people can understand in the first place?The costumes and sets are gorgeous. They're very understated, as you might expect from a smaller film with a tight budget, but quite accurate based on what I know of the time period. Visually The Final Inquiry is very convincing, which helps make up for the film's other flaws.The writers get big points for an original plotline that blends a fictional inquiry with a biblical story. It makes sense that Rome would make an inquiry into the matter of the missing body of a political criminal. What is less likely is that Emperor Tiberius would become attracted to Christianity.Still, The Final Inquiry is a mostly solid film that is ideal for Christian teens and young adults in particular. It's difficult not to compare it to big-screen biblical films like The Passion of the Christ, especially since both films share a couple of the same actors. Don't short-change yourself by judging this one against standards it was never meant to conform to in the first place.
'The Final Inquiry" is an Italian film that was made in English, but got dubbed over again [to cover the accents I presume] and is set during the Roman Empire, circa 33 AD. A series of earthquakes on a particular day that is felt around the world sets the Roman Emperor Tiberius Caesar [Max Von Sydow] to command one of his tribunes Titus Valerius Taurus [Daniel Loggia] to go to Jerusalem, where the Emperor believes the crucifixion of a certain Jesus from the province of Judea and the resurrection rumors surrounding him is reponsible for the events.Tribune Titus goes off to Jerusalem with a slave captured in fighting, a germanic warrior Brixas [Dolph Lundgren] and they encounter a group of people called the Nazarenes, who carry on the teachings of Jesus, in spite of persecution. They also meet Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor who finds Titus' inquiry into the whereabouts of Jesus' body a threat to his authority.Besides the search for answers as to how Jesus died, and what happened to his body afterwards, and the greater question of whether he was truly resurrected [Pilate and the Pharisees go to great lengths to try and disprove the resurrection theory], the other main plot centers around the romance that develops between Titus and a Nazarene, Tabitha and their love story holds the film together. Their chemistry is palbable [yes, its a Biblical story, yet the interplay of dialogue and emotion between these two is credibly done]. Titus finds himself drawn, despite his skepticism, to the noble manner in which the Nazarenes carry themselves, and a tragedy followed by a miracle causes him to question his own lack of faith.Though this is not "The Greatest Story Ever Told", it is a decently-made Biblical movie. The sets are quite convincing [I think the movie itself was shot in Tunisia] and the acting, though far from great, is credible. Dolph Lundgren as the slave warrior is quite convincing in his role, and the actors portraying Titus and Tabitha are credible too, as is the actor playing Pontius Pilate [who also portrayed pilate in The Passion of Christ]. For a hammy performance, look out for the actor portraying Caligula.Final verdict - a pleasantly watchable Biblical movie, but if your expectations are high, you may want to skip this one.
This movie has a different take on the resurrection of Jesus Christ. The emperor Tiberius Caesar dispatches a tribune, Titus Valierius Tauros (Daniele Liotti) to investigate the possibility of Jesus' resurrection. During his investigation, he crosses paths with the major characters in the Gospels and Acts and concludes the resurrection did in fact happen. Several well known (at least to me) actors appear in the movie: Max Von Sydow, F. Murray Abraham, and Dolph Lundgren.I would have enjoyed a bit more CSI flavor in Tauros' investigation, turning it more into an entertaining way to present information like Frank Morrison's Who Moved the Stone? Perhaps an intellectual companion along the lines of William of Baskerville in The Name of the Rose or Edith Pargeter's Brother Cadfael would drive the investigation forward not only through a 1st century version of a forensic investigation but also through the interaction between a Roman man of action and a 1st century man of thought similar to the interaction between Jack Aubrey and Dr. Maturin in Master and Commander.The ending left me a bit cold. Tiberius, upon receiving Tauros' report, resolves to prevail on the Senate to move to stop persecution of the Christians. However, his son, Caligula, realizing that could undermine the ideology of the emperor's divinity, assassinates Tiberius and has Tauros' report burned.A more interesting ending could have shown Tiberius contemplating the implications of Tauros' report, deciding it wasn't in the best interests of the empire, and then being killed by his son. That would have produced a more ironic comment on the difference between the kingdom of God and the kingdom of man.However, do watch the movie. It's clean entertainment and represents another step forward in creating Christian-themed entertainment with good production values.
Comparable to The Passion of Christ. This is an event that could have happened while the Passion of Christ is a movie about what actually happened
There are many excellent christian movies, but this is not one. The cinematography is decent, but, except in a few spots, the dialogue, the directing, acting and special effects are close to being simply awful. This reminds me of a rather badly put together high school production.
I am a Christian who also likes movies outside the purview of the Bible, but still based on good probability. If you want perfect realism, you are not going to get it in hollywood. I think many folks thought they were going to get another Da Vinci Code out of this movie; and don't understand Christian underpinnings at all. Rather interestingly, I have studied some of the historians who were not Biblical from this event, and they do in fact write of the sun turning dark, and earthquakes occurring. One of them Africanus, even tore down the historical rumor that the darkness was caused by an eclipse, and even posed the scientific evidence that this could not be true. However the fact that the darkness was reported over a large part of the Roman/Greco world, and did happen, was not disputed. The Romans were pretty sophisticated, and even had machines that helped determine the epicenter of earthquakes. It is very probable that certain inquiry was made into any thing that may have displeased the "gods" in Roman culture. They would not have discovered the Crucifixion incident until someone could travel to the area near the epicenter to find any event that fit their concept of an earth shattering event of human origin. They would have been looking for anything that hit the political radar down there to make a correlation. Only upon arrival would they make the connection to Christ's conviction and execution.Tiberius was not your regular dictator, he actually despised Rome and preferred to rule from his villa near the shore, and even set out on a boat once during a political scuffle in Rome. A prefect of the area in Germania, he would have had many friends in the army up there, so his ties to the investigator make sense for a story line. With his tendency toward thought instead of conquest and politic, I can imagine a man that would have been curious about anything as odious as natural signs of wrath of the gods. Many of the "facts" brought up in the investigation were written at least 3 hundred years later in the apocrypha 'Acts of Pilate' which are understood by almost all scholars as simple popular whimsical writings of faith disseminated by writers just trying to put out a good story. However, I'm sure they had at least a tinge of fact based on old traditions in the Church of the first centuries AD. Historical data retrieved in 1961 led to information that Pilate probably committed suicide in Gaul, as his fortunes turned for the worse in Caligula's rule. Besides, he probably didn't get much credit once the Romans had to burn Jerusalem to the ground and kill almost every Jew in sight. Failed rulers are not favored in Rome.I found the movie stimulating, and immediately began scurrying about to find if any of the characters were factual names of history, and could be researched to verify that they actually lived at the same time. Just verifying that was amazing, as the video industry rarely bothers themselves with any thing of an "investigative" nature. In fact the name of the movie is a contradiction to most anything of documentary flavor in the TV & Movie industry.
"The Final Inquiry" opens with the crucifixion of Jesus, followed by the earthquake. This is apparently felt around the world, not only by the emperor but even in Germany, where our hero, a Roman tribune named Tito, is fighting Germanic tribesmen. He picks up one named Brixos (Dolph Lundgren) as a servant, then is told that the emperor wants to see him. Arriving at Emperor Tiberius' island home, we're told that the emperor is curious about the earthquake, and has a report that a man named Jesus was crucified on the same day it happened. He wants Tito to head to Judea and find out about this Jesus guy.OK, a few things here. First, I find it hard to believe that in 33 AD there would have been a record of the crucifixion of a local criminal in an outskirt of the empire right there in the city of Rome's records, all within a few days AFTER it happened. Don't get me wrong, the Romans were pretty advanced, but among their many inventions fax machines were not one. I was also confused as to why the emperor was so interested in Jesus, when there's no real connection discerned between His execution and the earthquake (at least from the Roman perspective). It's later revealed that the emperor is interested in the possibility of being resurrected, but I still don't buy it. I'm guessing, since Max von Sydow plays Tiberius, that Max just wanted to know how Fabrizio Bucci did playing a role he had played decades ago.In script-writing classes they teach you about a thing called "suspension of disbelief". This is that point in the movie where you convince your audience to believe the plot (for example, Number Five becoming a conscious robot after getting struck by lightning in "Short Circuit"). This movie fails in the suspension of disbelief, and thus just a mere 10-15 minutes in you will find yourself going, "Huh?"So any way, Tito and Brixos head to Jerusalem incognito, and while meeting a contact they get ambushed by Jewish rebels. They manage to fight them off, then run away from a patrolling Roman unit - you know, the people who would be on their side. While running from his own people, Tito bumps into Tabitha (the same one from Acts) while she's being harassed by a drunkard. Tito scares the man away, then falls head over heels for Tabitha (no reason given except, you know, they're the leading roles and have to fall in love). He then - get this - tells this girl he's just met HIS FULL REAL NAME, and the fact he's A ROMAN. As she walks away she turns and SHOUTS HIS FULL NAME OUT IN THE OPEN!Ladies and gentlemen, the worst spy in the history of the world.The rest of the movie follows Tito and Brixos as they investigate the disappearance of Jesus and the possibility of the resurrection. They deal with the supposed cover-up by Jewish and Roman authorities, and watch as the apostle Stephen is killed. Paul makes an appearance, and I thought they would do more with him, but ultimately his appearance is just fanservice to Christians. You know how Chewbacca was pretty much only in Episode III so Star Wars fans could say, "Hey, that's Chewbacca!" Well, Paul's pretty much in here just so Christians can say, "Hey! That's Paul!" (for the record, I myself am Christian, and don't mean any of this in sarcasm against them - I think I just spared myself a lot of comments by clearing that up)A love story evolves between Tito and Tabitha, and when Tabitha is caned to death by her father (F Murray Abraham...what the heck is he doing in this movie?) Tito runs to Peter to ask him for help. Peter doesn't want to (wow, so much for "feed my sheep"!) so Tito has to guilt trip him into doing it. Peter relents and heals Tabitha, and Tito has his "born again" moment, becoming a Christian.One of the last sequences of the movie is with Tiberius back on his island, reading the letter from Tito. Tito confirms the resurrection of Jesus, so Tiberius tells his aides - I'm not making this up - that he's making Christianity the official religion of the empire. WHAT?! I don't claim to be an expert on Roman history, but I think I lost a few brain cells watching this scene. Actually I lost more a few seconds later when Tiberius' nephew Caligula smothers him to death and declares himself emperor, burning Tiberius' order regarding Christianity. I guess the fax machine broke and Tiberius couldn't have sent it quicker."The Final Inquiry" could have been like "The Robe" or even "Quo Vadis", in that it focuses on the early followers of Jesus rather than the life of Jesus Himself. Unfortunately, it's marred by a bad script with cheesy scenes and cliche character development (the born-again moment, two enemies becoming friends before one of them dies, etc). Even the fight sequences (yes, a Jesus movie with fight sequences involving death - I was reminded of that scene in "Dead Alive" where the priest jumps into a pack of zombies and declares, "I kick a** for the Lord!") don't do much to save it. The sole redeeming value of this film was the soundtrack by Andrea Morricone, which is admittedly very splendid. I wouldn't suggest viewing this, though. Unless, of course, you want to see Paul kick Stephen for five minutes straight.
I saw this on TBN a few nights ago, and found it exceeded my expectations. As a lawyer, I was drawn to it partially because of how it presented the truth or falsity of Jesus' Resurrection from the dead more or less as a type of "grand jury" inquiry, which, I believe, was exactly why the movie was named as it was. No grand miracles were provided, except for one healing toward the end of the picture, which serves to heal the protagonist's love interest, and, in so doing, show that the skeptic's usual denials that Jesus rose from death to life again are false. God can and does provide true life after death. As for the "inquiry" which follows, regarding the resurrection: first, the movie showed a scene where supposed disciples "stole" His body and tried to carry it away to re-bury it, thereby leading to the story that He didn't rise again, and everything that led from it thereafter was a lie. But, Titus finds that the supposed Christ body was not His; instead, the wounds supposedly made upon crucifixion were done after death. Also,the supposed 'disciples' he slew in finding the body were hired gladiators, obviously in the employ of Pilate. Next, they show, by "re-enacting" the raising of Lazarus via an unexpecting Titus, who was the one drugged, how a person can be drugged to simulate death and then awaken after several days. It is argued that both the raising of Lazarus and Christ's resurrection would then be no more than magical "tricks" to fool the populace into belief in Jesus. Titus believes that, until he finds out that a miracle CAN happen, but that takes place later. Third, they show that the Romans who were present at Jesus' death could and were pressured into falsely saying that He didn't die on Good Friday, so as to lead to the drugged-state-of-false-death version. But, Longinus, who was the Centurion in charge at the crucifixion, while being pressured by Pilate, maintains to Titus that he, himself, knew Jesus was dead before he threw his lance into Jesus' side. Each possibility is then shown to be false. So, no one could have drugged Jesus, and any disappearance of His body would then have to be either by stealing it or by His Resurrection. Finally, after first believing in the "drugging theory", Titus finds that miracles can and do happen when God, in the person of Peter the Apostle, intervenes and restores Titus' love interest to life after she, who had suffered an apparent head injury and died. Titus then concludes that the ancient Roman gods and goddesses are creations of man, and the God of Jesus is real, and that peace and love are the best ways to live. He recommends that Tiberius place his faith in Jesus' Resurrection, and leaves his post as a Roman officer to live with his lady-love. Although Caligula, who kills Tiberius, sends orders for Titus' assassination, boy gets girl, and both live happily(we hope) ever after. So much for the plot line. But there are other good things to mention. Another good feature of this movie was a view of Jesus' antagonists i.e., the persons who didn't want to let Jesus' Resurrection to become known and how they would have been acting after His supposed Resurrection. The Sanhedrin, i.e., the Jewish hierarchy, among whom was a person then known as "Saul of Tarsus"(later to become a great Christian apostle known as Paul), was at that time acting to suppress the early Christians, intervened when they learned that Rome had sent a fact-finder to Jerusalem and tried their best, with Pilate's cooperation, to make Titus see that the whole story about the Resurrection had been made up by the disciples. They were very active in trying to stamp out the Christian cult before it grew, and so when a disciple(Saint Stephen, "the first martyr") was caught, he was stoned to death. Meanwhile, Pilate, the Roman Procurator, didn't want Rome to meddle in his affairs, and also tried to either kill Titus or convince him that the whole story of Jesus' rising was false, invented by the disciples. I found the acting credible. I wasn't looking for an Academy Award type performance in this picture, as the purpose was obvious at the outset, i.e., to provide uplifting faith-based fare for Christians and to provide a first hand look at how any real official inquiry may have been conducted, with all the Biblical characters present, had any inquiry been ordered. The outcome, i.e., that Tiberius would order the Empire to become Christian, was, in my mind,unbelievable. The historical Tiberius wasn't the man protrayed in the movie, looking for life after death. Also, it seems too improbably that Tiberius would ever simply rely upon the report of one man, who had become romantically and personally involved, and then change the entire Classical god and goddess system that the Empire had been using and re-distribute the property of all the Empire, and destroy the slave-and-master system of owning persons to do the manual labor of the Empire, then in existence. So, Caligula, in life a cruel and insane man, fills the role in this movie of restoring us to the history we know, by killing Tiberius(borrowing, possibly, from the killing of Marcus Aurelius by his son, Commodus, in Gladiator?). The romance was done well, although I thought there was not enough time to develop the romance well enough especially since the two lovers were so different, and her contract marriage was not dealt with in a believable way. Nevertheless, the two actors were good looking, and did their lines and scenes believably, and we know that Cupid's arrow can shoot at anyone, ergo, why not a Roman Tribune and a Hebrew upper-class Teenager? So, for believers, it was a good two hour view; for nonbelievers, it was probably a waste of time, but it wasn't aimed toward nonbelievers anyway. I'd watch it again, and my wife also likes it.