The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Lord Andrew Lloyd Webber and Sir Tim Rice created "Jesus Christ Superstar" in 1970 and has been performed ever since whether in community, regional or school. It has been a popular musical revived many times. Gale Edwards, the female director, did a very good job in bringing the musical to the stage and life. The cast does a very good in their roles but none are memorable to me. Less than two hours long, the story of Jesus Christ's final days are well-known. Rik Mayall is memorable as King Herod. Renee Castle did a good job as Mary Magdalene.

This is the most inconsistent interpretation of JCS I ever seen and heard. While there were some aspects that I admired, there were others where I just couldn't help but turn away from the screen in disgust.The instrumental part was great throughout, much better than in the "original" Jewison's film. Especially the lower spectrum of the musical score has been captured very well, adding a new dimension to the sound. I have no complains about the the stage settings, light, camera work and overall directorship either -- although debatable, they were done professionally. The actors performances, on the other hand... are a different story.Jerome Pradon. I haven't heard of this actor before, but his expert performance made me a fan overnight. He's head and shoulders above the rest of the cast. Intelligence, drama, subtlety – he has it all covered. Here's one of the highlights: during "Hosanna" he keeps his usual sarcastic, thoughtful demeanor ("Enjoy this nonsense while you can... because it will get us into trouble soon"), until the moment the crowd shouts at Jesus: "Will you DIE for me?" Immediately upon catching the meaning, he jumps into full alert mode, first scanning the crowd to locate the source of the threat ("Someone wants to hurt my friend. They'll have to deal with me first."), then realizes that nothing can be done, gives bewildered Jesus a meaningful glance ("Didn't I try to tell you it would come to this? And you didn't want to listen?"), studies his face intently, thinks he read an answer to his unspoken question, smiles weakly ("You still don't. Who am I to you... Even if I give you my life, I can't save you from yourself... how ironic"), then turns away and sinks back into his sad thoughts. This whole scene is so full of psychological nuances and is so expertly played that, despite lasting only few seconds, is completely unforgettable. There are many other moments where Pradon's acting is just as brilliant. His singing is good, just not as good as his acting. It's very expressive. He seems quite a capable singer, I only wish his voice didn't crack ALL the time. This is a minor complain, though. Overall, if the film is worth watching at all, that's because of him.Renee Castle is lovable and sings well, although she is not very convincing as Magdalene. "So calm, so cool, no lover's fool" -- she appears exactly the opposite of her self-assessment, always looking too vulnerable, young and naive for an experienced former prostitute. Even considering her love might have affected her personality, at certain moments her past must have gotten the upper hand, especially when she had to deal with Judas' harassment.Caifas: As a singer, complete disaster. He can't sing in profondo range, no matter how hard he tries. Unfortunately, he tries repetitively, poor man, much to his embarrassment. I wonder why he didn't switch to an upper octave, or better yet, admitted it just wasn't his part and walked away. Since I had to skip forward, unable to bear his so called singing, I can't comment on this actor's performance.Michael Shaeffer. Screeching voice, menacing looks, a maniac in the flesh. The only problem, I don't think Annas was a maniac. If he's a villain, I envision him as a more cunning and subtle one.Fred Johanson. In his acting he is grossly, freakishly over the top, as if on a verge of a mental breakdown or performing in some sort of a parody of the original (think of "Spaceballs"). As for his singing -- this was the first time in my life when I wanted to puke at the first part of a musical phrase ("cluttering UPPPP!!!!!"... ugh) and liked the second part of it ("my haaall - waay"). Overall, his performance left me sad. Pilate deserves to be taken more seriously.Tony Vincent. Acting nonexistent. So what if he's supposed to represent a hardened extremist revolutionary? That's probably too much to ask from a "cutie" who can actually sing and dance.Rik Mayall. I actually liked his grotesque presentation. Indeed, he looked funny and menacing at the same time, quite fitting Herod's part. Unfortunately, his total inability to control his voice, which even topped that of Caifas', forced me to watch him with muted sound.Finally, Glenn Carter. Judging by his performance, I am not convinced that he is an actor at all. His depiction of Christ is pathetic and insulting. His acting is melodramatic in the worst possible sense. At one point, when he was going to pieces on the floor yet again, I literally felt nauseous and had to look away from the screen until he finished his act. His attempts to put a meaningful expression on his face were just as painful to watch. There were moments where he smiled, or frowned his brow, or made some other (usually irrelevant) grimace; but he seemed most comfortable keeping his face totally blank, as if recently treated with BOTOX. Not a single thought more complex than "now I must look sad / angry" or "just watch me... exercise my upper falcetto range" managed to surface in his eyes, either. Basically, he acted like an animated mannequin, a puppet, although maybe not as innocent as Pilate called him. Associating him with the protagonist even for a second? You gotta be kidding... Some say his performance presents Jesus as more human-like than Ted Neeley's. In my opinion, Terminator is more human-like than Carter's Jesus. His singing seemed orders of magnitude better than his acting. I guess I was so distracted by his abysmal acting that I couldn't give his singing the attention it probably deserved.Out of total five: three for the instrumental part, three for directing and camera work, four to Pradon, one to Castle, minus two to Carter, minus four to the rest of the cast.

This is a brilliant adaptation in some ways, and a strange one in others. The acting is extremely strong, though not always subtle; but then again, this is STAGE acting, though it takes a while for one to get used to how it translates on screen.The setting is great. Claustrophobic, dark, imperfect. It gives a real feeling of entrapment and suspense, that works wonder with this more Gothic re-visioning. The visuals are great; themes are explored with complexity and style. And this telling has one thing; buckets and buckets of style. It takes risks, and not all pay off, but do well.Glenn Carter gives a touching performance as Jesus, portraying the steely quiet of the divine and the hidden passion of his human side in a delightful mix. His voice is good, though squeaky at times, and his decline is heartbreaking.Reene Castle is sweet, feisty, and sort of helpless as Mary, Jesus's love interest and Judas's rival. Castle fleshes out her tense emotions with a un polished, vocal warmth that is pleasing and fitting to the character. She does a great job, overall.Judas was, well, bloody fantastic. He is loathsome, relatable, poignant, complex, and crazy with love all at the same time. Jerome's voice does take a lot of getting used to; the strange tonality and rough vocals add, as opposed to take away, from his character, and his deeply felt acting is just wonderful to watch. Even more interesting to observe is his relationship with Jesus that seems to border on the homoerotic; jealous of Mary and frustrated with Jesus's mixed teachings, but the subtext echoes frustration for not acknowledging his feelings. The best scenes are between Judas and Jesus; they crackle with chemistry, tension, and sadness.Simon is played with youthful, lively zeal, but it does feel a bit generic in voice and portrayal. Pilate gives a surprisingly tortured, touching, pained performance; his vocals are distinctive, being able to convey militant bravado and fragile uncertainty with great flair. Though at times melodramatic, his performance is sublime, and possibly one of my favourites. Herod has great moments, catching a double sided, prickly personality, but at times seems childish and his voice really wasn't up to scratch.Yeah. This takes risks, and it has its flaws, but is a fresh look at a powerful rock musical, and is worth a watch. Be warned though; this is like Marmite. You ether love it or hate it.

I thought this was an adequate performance but it's definitely not as good as the 1973 version. Carter seemed too angry, especially toward Judas. I have never, in any version of the story, ever felt that Jesus was angry at Judas, but rather forgiving if not supportive. Jesus did, after all have a choice in if he wanted to follow God's plan, being human and granted free-will. It may just be my opinion but Judas served in a necessary role and Jesus, knowing this, should not be so upset and dismissive of Judas. After his song 'Gethsemane' I always get the feeling he's still silently asking Pilate for help. He's already made up his mind to die but he's still trying to get out of it and I just don't see Jesus as doing that. Not that he can't still have doubts but that he shouldn't be so open about them.Pradon served the role of Judas well though he was not the best they could have cast. Personally I felt cheated when I learned that Tony Vincent who played Judas on the 2000 Broadway revival of JCS instead played Simon in the film. He was good enough on Broadway so why was he passed over for the film? Pradon himself said his voice isn't good enough for a staged production. But I did enjoy how he sang his part so heartbroken which is what I saw the character as, not evil but torn over his love for his friend and his worries over Jesus' followers getting out of hand. I also found it difficult to really tell when Judas comes back as an angel to sing 'Superstar' to Jesus as he carries his cross. Whereas in the 1973 version he descends on a star from above.Another problem I have with the film is with Mary Magdalene. I don't appreciate that they saw fit to insinuate that there was a romantic aspect to her and Jesus' relationship. When she decides to kiss Jesus while he is sleeping during her song 'I Don't Know How to Love Him' I still get angry. I don't care that she's in love. She should have more self-control than to go around kissing men especially given her reputation. Even if Christ isn't concerned about how others see him she should at least not make it any worse.All in all the only part I enjoyed about the performance was Judas' singing in his red leather jacket at the end and the fact that Tony Vincent was in front of the camera even if he wasn't a huge part of the story. I'd recommend it only if you can't get your hands on the 1973 Jesus Christ Superstar. No one can sing Jesus like Ted Neely; Judas like Carl Anderson; or Mary Magdalene like Yevonne Elliman.