Luther [DVD] [2003]

The performances are solid, occasionally stunning. Joseph Fiennes (Shakespeare in 'Shakespeare in Love') does an exceptional job portraying Germany's turbulent priest, whose search for knowledge and personal salvation leads him to question all around him. The action moves quickly in the film, collapsing complex historical and theological items into almost single-issue ciphers for clarity in the film -- one might be forgiven for coming away from the film believing that Luther tacked up a declaration of 1 Thesis rather than 95 Theses, and that the Roman church was corrupt entirely. The tension within the church is alluded to in a few spots (the cardinal who hopes for a pope who will save the church, etc.), but by and large, the Roman church is portrayed with a broad brush as evil.

The scenes in which the peasants revolt and the people take Luther's messages to extremes are dramatically produced and emotionally moving without being gruesome or needlessly gory. The complexities of the people's wavering support for Luther, and Luther's occasional collaborations against the people, are similarly glossed over.

Fiennes is shown in a few points preaching to the people, as a priest and as a street leader -- Luther was known to be an effective preacher and teacher, and this comes across here. Luther's time as a professor of theology is, like much of the story, collapsed into a brief series of scenes, again simplifying the complexity of faculty and academic dealings into a few figures either supporting or worrying about the controversy being stirred.

The historical progession is kept fairly accurate, going from early days in ministry and schooling to early awakenings in the light of his travels and teaching, to the Diet of Worms and the final climax of the film taking place in Augsburg, showing the recitation (and assuming the victory) of the Augsburg Confession, a document still recited to this day.

Sir Peter Ustinov steals every scene he appears in, as Philip the Wise, an almost bumbling and good-hearted soul, who is probably the most ahistorical figure in the film. Luther's primary sponsors were neither bumbling nor innocent, but rather political animals of the first rank, and to a certain extent, the political side of the Reformation owed as much to military and economic freedom from Roman overlordship and the fracturing of Germanic unity with the slow and steady downfall of what remained of the Holy Roman Empire. This tension is hinted at in the film, particularly in the post-script, but is really secondary to the primary point of the film.

Claire Cox portrays Katerina von Borg, the run-away nun who became Luther's wife. Her role is virtually non-existent through most of the film, and save pressuring Luther into deciding to take a wife, she seems to have little role in Luther's political or theological development, which is likewise not true to history. Another key character, Johann Tetzel, the man whose preaching specifically prompted Luther's writing of the 95 Theses, (portrayed by Alfred Molina), is presented as a very one-dimensional and corrupt character only interested in selling indulgences, which is rather far from the truth of Tetzel, also.

Despite these drawbacks (understandable, given that in two hours, writers and directors have to be selective in choosing material), there are occasionals glimpses of the fascinating history surrounding church and society during Luther's time -- for instance, the fact that not only were scriptures removed from access to the laity, they were in fact rarely read by the clergy. The character of Luther specifically says that he relies on scripture AND reason (something the sola scriptura crowd tend to forget). The real threat to Christendom from the newly-expanding Muslims lingers in the background (the city of Constantinople, whose walls had been unbreached for a thousand years, had fallen just a few decades prior, and the idea of yet another Crusade against the Muslims was being seriously considered).

This film presents a sympathetic figure in Luther, one that the church would have done well to retain rather than cast out -- but then, churches have a tendency to cast out for authoritarian/hierarchical/institutional reasons those they ought to embrace on theological and pastoral grounds. Luther's darker side is only hinted at -- the character says at one point that he is a divisive figure, and this remains true until the end of his life, and even Lutheranism split from other Reformers, and even among itself, as many Lutheran followers modified official Lutheranism into something Luther himself probably would not have been able to accept.

In history, Luther gets portrayed with a broad brush as a bold reformer, taking on the powers that be to lead the Western world into an era of Reformation (prompting, not to long after, the Counter-Reformation in the Roman church). In this film, with sensitivity and compassion, Luther is portrayed without too many dimensions (his anti-Judaic stance, for instance, is never even hinted at in the film) but with an aim toward presenting the point -- that it is sometimes worth taking a stand of faith and reason against seemingly incalculable odds.


A great film   January 29, 2005
Kurt Messick (London, SW1)
8 out of 10 found this review helpful

Luther is a remarkable film in many ways. One disclaimer should be made -- this is not a documentary, in which the standard phrase about scenes being created or adapted for dramatic purposes would be made. No such disclaimer is given here, but the serious observer watching for history as well as entertainment should be warned not to accept everything at face value.

The performances are solid, occasionally stunning. Joseph Fiennes (Shakespeare in 'Shakespeare in Love') does an exceptional job portraying Germany's turbulent priest, whose search for knowledge and personal salvation leads him to question all around him. The action moves quickly in the film, collapsing complex historical and theological items into almost single-issue ciphers for clarity in the film -- one might be forgiven for coming away from the film believing that Luther tacked up a declaration of 1 Thesis rather than 95 Theses, and that the Roman church was corrupt entirely. The tension within the church is alluded to in a few spots (the cardinal who hopes for a pope who will save the church, etc.), but by and large, the Roman church is portrayed with a broad brush as evil.

The scenes in which the peasants revolt and the people take Luther's messages to extremes are dramatically produced and emotionally moving without being gruesome or needlessly gory. The complexities of the people's wavering support for Luther, and Luther's occasional collaborations against the people, are similarly glossed over.

Fiennes is shown in a few points preaching to the people, as a priest and as a street leader -- Luther was known to be an effective preacher and teacher, and this comes across here. Luther's time as a professor of theology is, like much of the story, collapsed into a brief series of scenes, again simplifying the complexity of faculty and academic dealings into a few figures either supporting or worrying about the controversy being stirred.

The historical progession is kept fairly accurate, going from early days in ministry and schooling to early awakenings in the light of his travels and teaching, to the Diet of Worms and the final climax of the film taking place in Augsburg, showing the recitation (and assuming the victory) of the Augsburg Confession, a document still recited to this day.

Sir Peter Ustinov steals every scene he appears in, as Philip the Wise, an almost bumbling and good-hearted soul, who is probably the most ahistorical figure in the film. Luther's primary sponsors were neither bumbling nor innocent, but rather political animals of the first rank, and to a certain extent, the political side of the Reformation owed as much to military and economic freedom from Roman overlordship and the fracturing of Germanic unity with the slow and steady downfall of what remained of the Holy Roman Empire. This tension is hinted at in the film, particularly in the post-script, but is really secondary to the primary point of the film.

Claire Cox portrays Katerina von Borg, the run-away nun who became Luther's wife. Her role is virtually non-existent through most of the film, and save pressuring Luther into deciding to take a wife, she seems to have little role in Luther's political or theological development, which is likewise not true to history. Another key character, Johann Tetzel, the man whose preaching specifically prompted Luther's writing of the 95 Theses, (portrayed by Alfred Molina), is presented as a very one-dimensional and corrupt character only interested in selling indulgences, which is rather far from the truth of Tetzel, also.

Despite these drawbacks (understandable, given that in two hours, writers and directors have to be selective in choosing material), there are occasionals glimpses of the fascinating history surrounding church and society during Luther's time -- for instance, the fact that not only were scriptures removed from access to the laity, they were in fact rarely read by the clergy. The character of Luther specifically says that he relies on scripture AND reason (something the sola scriptura crowd tend to forget). The real threat to Christendom from the newly-expanding Muslims lingers in the background (the city of Constantinople, whose walls had been unbreached for a thousand years, had fallen just a few decades prior, and the idea of yet another Crusade against the Muslims was being seriously considered).

This film presents a sympathetic figure in Luther, one that the church would have done well to retain rather than cast out -- but then, churches have a tendency to cast out for authoritarian/hierarchical/institutional reasons those they ought to embrace on theological and pastoral grounds. Luther's darker side is only hinted at -- the character says at one point that he is a divisive figure, and this remains true until the end of his life, and even Lutheranism split from other Reformers, and even among itself, as many Lutheran followers modified official Lutheranism into something Luther himself probably would not have been able to accept.

In history, Luther gets portrayed with a broad brush as a bold reformer, taking on the powers that be to lead the Western world into an era of Reformation (prompting, not to long after, the Counter-Reformation in the Roman church). In this film, with sensitivity and compassion, Luther is portrayed without too many dimensions (his anti-Judaic stance, for instance, is never even hinted at in the film) but with an aim toward presenting the point -- that it is sometimes worth taking a stand of faith and reason against seemingly incalculable odds.


Packed with important Christian history   March 3, 2005
A.Trendl HungarianBookstore.com (Glen Ellyn, IL USA)
5 out of 7 found this review helpful

As religious biographies set to film go, "Luther" is among the best. Few serious directors have taken on the topic of Christian history since "The Ten Commandments." After the movie better informed about Martin Luther and the Reformation.

Although important parts of Luther's life, positions and views are glazed over or ignored, it serves to incite curiosity about his 95 Theses and the Augsburg Confession.

The difficulty with a film portrayal of one of Christian history's more influential figures is that the historical Martin Luther could not be captured into a couple of hours. It is just a movie, and is not supposed to address complex eternal questions.

Protestant Christians will bristle at the brief look at Luther's theology, and the emphasis on the politics. What else could a filmmaker do? Already, such a film was destined for a short life in the theaters, and the fact is true: much of the issues surrounding Luther stemmed from his reaction to politics.

Roman Catholics might be upset by the anti-Catholic slant. I do not think the film was meant to put Catholicism in a bad light as much as it was meant to show what events and concerns caused Luther to react. The movie was aptly titled "Luther" and not "The Beginning of the Reformation" or "The Great Religious Revolt."

Indulgences have never been one of Catholicism's honorable or defensible provisions. There is no telling of Luther's story without examining the abuses of men looking to profit from the fear and guilt of illiterate believers. A modern Catholic will rightly note that personal Scripture among the laity is now encouraged by Rome, and be frustrated as he acknowledges indulgences are still part of the present Catholic theology.

Lutherans will find the movie intriguing, realizing Luther's battle against Rome begot their own denomination. Coming back to the origin of the Lutheran faith will be exciting and educational.

Joseph Fiennes is believable, albeit a little wooden. His Luther will remind viewers of Jeremy Irons' character in "The Mission." He is noble, calm and steadfast. Like Irons' priest, Luther faces great adversity through his desire to follow Jesus Christ.

Luther comes across as a noble would-be martyr. He shows godly courage, and a few levels of depth. What is not shown are his own imperfections and inconsistencies. If this is all you know about Martin Luther, then you only know one small, if not important, side of him. Like St. Peter, like Deitrch Bonhoeffer, Luther had clear imperfections, yet he still stoof up for his beliefs.

When Luther writhes in angst against temptation and evil, he speaks angrily to Satan as would anyone to his most cursed enemy. Like C. S. Lewis' Wormwood in "The Screwtape Letters," we can taste the insidious, pervasive nature of Satan. The spiritual conflict endured by Luther is not the glamorized head-spinning of "The Exorcist," but shows that he was not merely fighting flesh and blood entities through academic arguments.

My recommendation of "Luther" is 100%. Sunday school, CCD and high school groups could watch it as fodder for discussion. This isn't for the "Adventures In Odyssey" or "Veggie Tales" crowd. My small group watched it, and discussed it comparing it with what we understood of Scripture. Could we stand as Luther stood for the defense of God's Word?

A solid companion to the movie is "Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther" by Roland Herbert Bainton. It is an excellent addition to church video libraries.

Anthony Trendl


Gripping Movie   June 1, 2010
Novel Thoughts
1 out of 2 found this review helpful

Luther is one of the best Christian movies I have seen. I don't know what the budget was but it looks great. The cast are superb, real quality actors and it shows. I know a certain amount about Luther but certainly not as much as some of the other reviewers on here. However, purely as a movie I'd definately recommend this. The story doesn't drag, you are gripped throughout and Joseph Fiennes is compelling to watch. Some other Christian products I'd recommend:


Godstone: The Kairos Boxes

Chosen Ones #1 (Aedyn Chronicles)





the power of conscience   January 24, 2005
Alejandra Vernon (Long Beach, California)
2 out of 4 found this review helpful

As in "A Man for All Seasons", the struggle of faith and conscience makes for riveting viewing, and this is a brilliant depiction of the 16th century, and the life of Martin Luther, whose ideas were deemed heretical and sparked untold violence. Joseph Fiennes is excellent as Luther, and convincingly gives us a portrait of a man who grew in his faith as it was challenged, and became the power that changed the Christian world, and who translated the Bible into language that could be understood by the people, when most (including many of the clergy) were ignorant of scripture.

There are some other terrific performances, notably Sir Peter Ustinov, in his last film, as Frederick the Wise, and Bruno Ganz in a sensitive, moving portrayal of Johann von Staupitz, the abbot who was Luther's counselor. Also excellent is Jochen Horst as Andreas Karlstadt, who had a radical approach to the Reformation, and was responsible for much of the violence that occurred.
The costuming and sets are remarkable in their feel and look of the era, and the score by Richard Harvey is dramatic and wonderful.

With an intelligent script, well paced direction by Eric Till, and beautiful cinematography (shot on location in Germany, Italy, and the Czech Republic) by Robert Fraisse, this film is immensely thought-provoking as well as entertaining, and will be of interest to anyone who enjoys films on Christianity.
It certainly should not be viewed as anti-Catholic, but like the Spanish Inquisition, as a telling of one of the dark periods of its history, and amnesia of the past doesn't in any way help the present, and can be a safeguard for the future.
The Special Features include interviews with Joseph Fiennes, Sir Peter Ustinov, Claire Cox, and Alfred Molina, and though they are interesting, it's too bad they broke their comments up into little sections.
Total running time is 124 minutes.