SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

One of the best films i have seen

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Jesus (Adam Greaves-Neal), Mary (Sara Lazzaro) and Joseph (Vincent Walsh) had fled from Bethlehem to Egypt to avoid King Herod's decree of killing every male baby hoping to kill Jesus, a rival that threatened him. When they learn of King Herod's death, the family returns home to Nazareth only to become aware that Herod's son (Jonathan Bailey) is after the same thing as his father. Jesus at 7-years of age is aware that his family is keeping secrets from him.The birth of Jesus, the finding of Jesus in the Temple by Mary, and the wedding in Canaan are the three events we are most familiar with until Jesus begins his ministry at 30-years of age. In this story we see that Jesus doesn't really know who he is. He can do things like perform miracles, but doesn't know why he can do these things. He asks many questions and eventually Mary tells him of his birth and who he really is and that he must hide his powers until God tells him when he can use them. We see Roman Centurion Severus (Sean Bean) ordered by Herod to find and kill Jesus and this takes up most of the movie. And yes, they do meet for a second time. (A second time???)We also see The Demon (Rory Keenan) following Jesus as he is not sure who Jesus is. Jesus is the only one who can see and hear The Demon. This is not a Christian exposé, so to speak, so we do not get a lot of Christianity and benefits thereof. But no worries as this Is not a revival. (Thank you)This is a story made up by Anne Rice - the Vampire authoress - about a boy learning who he is and the family and friends protecting him from harm. However, if those of you who have read the Valtorta books you know Jesus knew who he was from the very start. Be that as it may, this is a refreshing look into "maybe it was like this." Everything was constructive and nothing was destructive and it's a very enjoyable story.You can almost believe that Jesus may have looked like and behaved as we see Adam Greaves-Neal behave in this story. And that's a nice touch. This is a well presented production and the acting all around is very good. (7/10)Violence: Yes, some not much. Sex: No. Nudity: No. Language: No.

first - a bizarre film. for the not inspired cast, for the large isles of non sense, for the absence of precise purpose. it is not a Christian film and not a religious one. only a strange embroidery of fragments from the Gnostic Gospels, few good actors in uncomfortable roles and a chaotic story. the dialogues, the acting, the generous message - all is fake or wrong or almost blasphemy. result - a kind of surrogate. the young Adam Greaves - Neal is far to be the perfect choice for a role who represents only source of confusion. Sara Lazzaro must be a second Olivia Hussley from the Jesus of Zeffireli. but her role remains a sketch. Jonathan Bailey gives a barefooted Herod without any precise purpose because his status is only as decoration. Sean Bean, the poor Sean Bean... Jane Lapotaire does her the best try but the old Sarah is impossible to be credible as result of confuse script. the Bible is ignored and the Gnostic texts as used only as pretext. the result - a film with interesting idea about nothing. or only an exercise of blasphemy.

Young Messiah is a fictional tale about JC. It has almost nothing to do with the Gospels, and what little does line up is subject to a strong literary license. i.e. It's not Scriptural at all. The title - btw - should be a clue. According to earlier reviews, some of this arises from non-canonical texts. Those reviewers should read those non-canonical texts before commenting, since the only consistency between those texts and the film are vaguely similar notions - like raising a boy from the dead. ... The film has less relation to those texts than to the Gospels. The texts in question are the Infancy Gospel of Thomas, James and Matthew. If you cannot handle a 'fiction' about JC, don't see the flick.On the other hand, the flick is clean. The casting is brilliant. The actors and actresses do a first rate job. At no point does anyone do anything disrespectful. The music is first rate, if not as memorable as some. The film was shot on location in Italy, and could easily be the Holy Land during a wetter clime. ... In other words, if one leaves his biases and bigotry at home, one might enjoy a flick that would remind one of an old 50's bible epic.

The movie had a great interaction between the cast. A developing story line and entertaining characters. Almost every and any Christian could find fault with historical facts/figures presented as part of typical nitpicking. Based upon our exposure and experience to not only the bible but other historical sources. Thankfully the story was not about historical accuracy but about a young Jesus, and a very good story at that. It is based upon the creative hypothetical. What would it be like to be Jesus growing up? Concentrating on a short span of time but including Jesus's trip to Jerusalem for Passover when he is just 7 years of age. I found it thoughtful, illuminating and satisfying. I am sure many will too. Go see it ye Christian soldiers.