Gabriel García Márquez’s (1927–2014) One Hundred Years of Solitude is a masterpiece of magical realism; at once stoic, uplifting, comically despondent, and burdened by the fatigue of generational inheritance. Yet the novel is less an invention of imagination than a genealogical metaphor of memory, familial hope, and civilizational rise and fall. It rises like a sanctuary built from familiar tablets: the Bible, Cervantes, Voltaire, Tolstoy, Proust, Faulkner, Joyce, Steinbeck, and Borges. Each echo resounds through the Colombian fictional town of Macondo, transforming it into a mythic stage where memory, estrangement, and loneliness endlessly repeat.
From the very first pages, Márquez threads this cycle with solitude: literally. Including the title, the word appears fifty‑two times in the century‑long history of Macondo and the Buendías. This repetition carries a biblical resonance, binding the family of protagonists and antagonists alike to a penitential tether, chained to their founding dynasty.
In Spanish, soledad is semantically broader than its English counterpart. It signifies estrangement and alienation, being cut off from community, intimacy, or history, even exiled. Yet it also carries the weight of aloneness and solitude: quiet, contemplative, existential. Both registers coexist, and the Spanish reader does not have to choose.
For the English reader, however, the word disconnects, pulling them towards a definition that resists the narrative. The translator, and likely Márquez himself, kept this tension to force meditation not only on the word but on the characters’ purgatory. The Buendías are lost in their obsessions, unable to connect to those around them. In the first half of the book, solitude leans toward estrangement and alienation; by the latter half, it transforms into aloneness, as the Buendías begin to accept their fate. The family lives together in their sanctuary but they live their lives separate and alone. In its final use, the meaning retreats back to estrangement and collective dissolution, a history erased, trapped in a myth of their own making: “because races condemned to one hundred years of solitude did not have a second opportunity on earth.”
Márquez saturates the Buendía saga with biblical archetypes, weaving Genesis, Exodus, Revelation, and Marian purity into the fabric of Macondo: an Eden where death was alien, maturing into purgatory, then the Flood, and finally apocalypse. José Arcadio Buendía, the founder, is Adam and Noah at once, naming the world yet cursed by forbidden knowledge. “The earth is round, like an orange,” he declares, signaling a lifelong obsession with the metaphysical and the scientific. His wife, Úrsula Iguarán, is Eve and Sarah, burdened by genealogy and the fear of incest as original sin, a fear that culminates in the pig’s tail. Melquíades, the gypsy prophet, is Elijah and Daniel, his parchments the scripture of Macondo. The saga culminates in apocalyptic imagery: four years of rain, a final wind of destruction, Revelation retold as estrangement and erasure: endless solitude.
But Márquez’s tablets of echoes reach further, extending beyond scripture into the canon of world literature. The novel from the first pages breeds familiarity with the reader. One Hundred Years of Solitude is less a solitary invention than a refracting of the great books through Macondo’s myth. Its pages carry the shadows of Ovid’s transformations, Homer’s wanderings, Cervantes’ absurd quests, Kafka’s fate, Borges’ magic, and Proust’s memory; a literary inheritance reborn in Macondo’s myth.
These echoes form the very foundations of the narrative, opening into critiques of power, class, and the absurdity of the human condition. They expose an overreliance on human appetites; sexuality, incest, adultery, compulsion; that drive the fate of the family. The Buendías cannot conquer their world or their desires. Noble beginnings collapse into a fated Sartrian No Exit. And in the end, the Buendías’ saga dissolves into futility, their century of solitude reduced to the bitter irony that “wisdom was worth nothing if it could not be used to invent a new way of preparing chickpeas.”
Graphic: Gabriel Garcia Marquez by Jose Lara, 2002. Flickr
Beelzebub has been wandering through western civilization since the Philistines appeared on the scene in the 12th century BC. The polytheistic Philistines of Ekron, one of their five cities within Canaan, worshiped Beelzebub, Baal-Zebub in the Philistine language, as a minor god of healing and protection from diseases, mainly from flies. In the semitic languages Beelzebub was literally known as the “Lord of the Flies”. (In Indo-European languages some interpretations suggest that Beelzebub is translated into a more friendly Lord of the Jungle.)
As monotheistic traditions took root in Canaan, Beelzebub shifted from a protective deity to a purveyor of evil, demonized within emerging Jewish thought. By the 9th century BC, the prophet Elijah condemned the Israel King Ahab and the prophets of Baal for worshiping this god rather than the true God of the Jews. By the time of the New Testament, which mentioned him 7 times in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, he was associated with Satan, who represented the emperor of Hell.
In Matthew and Mark, the Pharisees accused Jesus of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub or the “Prince of the Demons”. Jesus counters by exclaiming that “Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself will not stand.” Jesus’ response backed the Pharisees into a corner, if they admitted that Jesus was casting out demons by God’s power, then they would have to acknowledge his divine authority. But if they insisted, he was working with Satan, they would have to explain why Satan would undermine his own influence: a house divided will not stand. (Lincoln in an 1858 speech used the same words with a moral rather than religious meaning, granted that is a very fine line, “A house divided against itself cannot stand,” suggesting that the evils of slavery would lead to collapse of the country.)
Between the 15th and 17th centuries Beelzebub was transformed into one of the seven princes of Hell: Lucifer the Emperor, Satan, Leviathan, Belphegor, Mammon, Asmodeus, and Beelzebub. Beelzebub represented the deadly sins of gluttony and envy.
In modern times Beelzebub remains a symbol of evil in literature and culture. John Milton’s Paradise Lost cast him as a chief demon and William Golding’s Lord of the Flies takes a more ancient meaning associated with corruption and destruction.
From an ancient minor Philistine god to Satan during the times of Jesus, to a major Christian demon in medieval times, back to Satan himself in modern times; Beelzebub’s transformation reflects the shifting religious and cultural landscapes over millennia, but demons will always have a name. In Mark 5:9, Jesus asks a possessed man, “What is your name?” The demon responds, “My name is Legion, for we are many.”
Graphic: Satan and Beelzebub by William Hayley, Jean Pierre Simon, Richard Westall: Paradise Lost. Public Domain.
God’s Edenic Covenant with Adam and Eve in which they were promised eternal life and given dominion over the animals stipulated that they were to obey one command: not to eat the fruit from the tree of knowledge (of good and evil).
That didn’t work out well for Adam and Eve, so he made a covenant with Noah after the flood that included seven laws for man to live a just and moral life. With man’s observance, God promised to never destroy the world by flood again. God sealed the covenant by creating a rainbow.
The seven laws of Noah:
1 – Do not worship false gods
2 – Do not curse God.
3 – Do not murder.
4 – Do not commit adultery or sexually immorality.
5 – Do not steal.
6 – Do not eat flesh from a living animal.
7 – Establish courts of justice.
Source: Seven Laws of Noah by Slon Anava, 2014, Azmut. Graphic: Noahs Dankgebet by Domenico Morelli 1901, Public Domain.
Shortly after the Israelites exodus from Egypt around 1500 BC Moses received the Ten Commandments from God who further instructed Moses to have Bezalel build an Ark to house the commandments and He gives specific instructions on how the Ark should be built. Since no pictures are known to exist for the actual Ark, Spielberg’s rendition, built for “Raiders of the Lost Ark” movie, is as good as anything that currently depicts it.
The Ark was initially kept in the ancient Samarian sanctuary city of Shiloh in a tabernacle built under Moses direction and remained there for 369 years.
During the battle of Eben-ezer in 1180 BC the Israelites were defeated by the Philistines, bringing the Ark back to the Philistine pentapolis city of Ashdod, just south of the present-day Tel Aviv, as part of their plunder of Shiloh. Upon capturing the Ark, the Philistines were beset by plagues and misfortune and decided that it would be best to return it to the Israelites.
After its return it eventually settled in Kiriath-Jearim where it remained for about 20 years. King David eventually brought the Ark to Zion or the City of David. When Solomon succeeded David, he had the Ark brought to his temple in Jerusalem sometime in the 10th century BC, no earlier than 957 BC.
Around 586 BC the Neo-Babylonian Empire destroyed Jerusalem and Solomon’s Temple. After this destruction the Ark disappeared, and its location has been a mystery ever since.
Legends and myths say the Ark was destroyed, or it is currently in Ethiopia, or in the Philistine city of Ekron, or beneath Jerusalem, or on Mount Nebo, or in a cave near the Dead Sea, or the Romans captured it during the Jewish revolts in the 1st and 2nd centuries AD, or aliens took it.
Source: Bible. BibleArchaeology.org. Wikipedia. Graphic: Ark from “The Raiders of the Lost Ark”
Josephus’s 20 volume history of the Jews titled: The Antiquities of the Jews was written to provide an account of the Jewish people for his Roman patrons and protectors.
Below is a synopsis of the 20 volumes:
Biblical creation to the death of Abraham’s son Isaac
History of Isaac’s sons to the Exodus of Jews from Biblical Egypt
Exodus from Egypt to the first 2 years of the 40 years in the wilderness
The remaining 38 years in the wilderness to the death of Moses upon reaching Canaan
Joshua’s replacement of Moses as leader to the death of the priest Eli
The capture of the Ark by the Philistines to the death of King Saul
David’s ascension to the throne of the Kingdom of Israel to the death of King David
Solomon’s ascension as King of Israel to the death of King Ahab
Reign of King Jehoshaphat to the fall of Samaria
Babylonian captivity of the Jews and the destruction of the Neo-Assyrian Empire
Start of the Persian Empire of Cyrus the Great to the death of Alexander the Great
Death of Alexander the Great to the Maccabean Revolt
Origins of the Hasmonean dynasty to the death of Queen Alexandra
The death of Queen Alexandra to the death of Antigonus II Mattathias
Herod the Great’s taking of Jerusalem to the completion of King Herod’s temple
Completion of King Herod’s temple to the death of Herod’s sons
Death of Herod’s sons to the banishment of King Archelaus
Josephus history covers major portions of the Old Testament including Genesis, Exodus, Numbers, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel 1&2, 1&2 Kings, 1&2 Chronicles, and Prophets. Josephus’s accounts provide for additional material and commentary not found in other texts including the bible.
Source: Josephus: The Complete Works, 2003. Jewish Virtual Library. World History Encyclopedia. Graphic Joseph, Son of Gorian, by Thomas Emmet, 1880, public domain.
Paul L. Maier, born 1930 in St. Louis, author, public speaker, and historian has written twenty-three adult and children, fiction and non-fiction, books about Christianity. He is the son of Walter A. Maier, founder, and speaker of The Lutheran Hour.
He graduated from Harvard and Concordia Seminary in St. Louis with additional studies in Heidelberg, Germany and Basel, Switzerland. He was the Seibert Professor of Ancient History at Western Michigan University until he retired in 2011.
In addition to his definitive translation of “Eusebius: The Church History“, his 1993 “Skeleton in God’s Closet” was a number one best seller in religious fiction, a thriller concerning the Resurrection of Jesus. He also co-wrote with Hank Hanegraaff in 2006 a rebuttal to Dan Brown’s “The Da Vinci Code“: “The Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction?“
In addition to writing books Maier has produced six religious documentaries including the 2014 “The Week That Changed the World“, detailing the Holy Week before Jesus’s resurrection, discussing the key personalities, the politics, and the treachery that sealed Christ’s fate.
MaierBibliography-Books and Documentaries:
A Man Spoke, A World Listened: The Story of Walter A. Maier 1963
Pontius Pilate 1968
First Christmas: The True and Unfamiliar Story in Words and Pictures 1971
First Easter: The True and Unfamiliar Story in Words and Pictures 1973
First Christians: Pentecost and the Spread of Christianity 1976
Flames of Rome 1981
The Best of Walter A. Maier 1981 (paperback)
Josephus, The Essential Writings 1988
In Fullness of Time 1991
A Skeleton in God’s Closet 1994
The Very First Christmas 1998
The New Complete Works of Josephus with William Whiston 1999
Eusebius: The Church History 1999
The Very First Easter 2000
More Than a Skeleton 2003
Caspar Schwenckfeld on the Person and Work of Christ: A Study of Schwenckfeldian Theology at Its Core 2004 (paperback)
Martin Luther a Man Who Changed the World 2004
The Da Vinci Code: Fact or Fiction? with Hank Hanegraaf 2006
The Real Story of Creation 2007
The Real Story of the Flood 2008
A Skeleton in Rome 2011
The Constantine Codex 2011
The Genuine Jesus 2021
Christianity: The First Three Centuries (Documentary) 2003
The Odyssey of St. Paul (Documentary) 2003
Jesus: Legend or Lord? (Documentary) 2003
How We Got the Bible (Documentary) 2009
Christianity and the Competition (Documentary) 2010
The Week that Changed the World (Documentary) 2011
Eusebius Biography:
FootnoteA
“May I be an enemy to no one and the friend of what abides eternally. May I never quarrel with those nearest me and be reconciled quickly if I should. May I never plot evil against others, and if anyone plots evil against me, may I escape unharmed and without the need to hurt anyone else.” — Eusebius
Eusebius of Caesarea, also known as Eusebius Pamphili, was a historian, interpreter of scripture, and Christian apologist, born around 260-265 AD in Caesarea, where he gained prominence in the fourth century, before passing away around 339 AD. His early education was by the learned presbyter, and eventual saint, Pamphilus, the principle religious scholar of his generation. Eusebius became bishop of Caesarea around 314 AD, shortly after Constantine became Roman Emperor, and remained in that position until his death in 339 AD. Eusebius became a significant figure in the theological controversies and politics of his day, becoming a, if not the leading spiritual advisor and confidant to Constantine.
Christians since the time of Christ were persecuted for their faith which came to a ghoulish crescendo under the Diocletian Edicts, also known as “The Edicts Against the Christians” of 303 AD. The edicts dissolved the Christians’ legal rights, compelled them to reject Jesus and to adhere to the local religious customs of paganism and polytheism. The edict saw the destruction of Christian scripture and churches along with the torture and execution of approximately 3500 church leaders and lay people including Eusebius’ teacher Pamphilus. The persecution ended with the Edict of Milian in 313 AD, decreed and signed by Constantine and Licinius proclaiming religious toleration within the empire.
FootnoteB
The edict gained the life-long gratitude of Eusebius culminating in the Christian bishop’s panegyric, “Life of Constantine“, in which the author details the emperor’s religious policies as well as a hagiographic account of Constantine’s life. Historians have described their relationship as complex, evolving over time. They have also stated that Eusebius may have been the power behind the throne or, as others have surmised, just an obsequious toady seeking protection from his church enemies. Regardless of the actual relationship it is agreed that Eusebius was Constantine’s spiritual and political advisor.
FootnoteC
Eusebius, through his bond with the emperor, helped structure the relationship between church and state, assisting in the creation of the Constantinian concept of a Christian empire, which had a considerable influence on the development of the early Christian Church and the Roman Empire, along with empires to come.
Constantine, to put down an early rebellion of church leaders, ordered three hundred bishops throughout the empire to meet at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD to resolve the controversy of Arianism, a concept that Christ was not divine but was created by God. Much of the Church believed that Christ was of the same substance, “consubstantiality“, as the Father and as such: divine. Eusebius, enjoying the emperor’s favor, sat next to him at the council and offered his own creed stating that Christ was begotten, not made, from the Father. The council, in the end, rejected Arianism and formulated the creed that is recited at every High Catholic Mass to this day. The council also set the time for Easter as the Sunday after the first full moon following the Spring equinox rather than occurring on the Sunday closest to Jewish Passover or on the Jewish Passover even it was not on a Sunday. Which explains why no one knowns when Easter occurs. Constantine was adamant about foregoing any Jewish practices in the honor of Jesus.
Eusebius is referred to as the “Father of Church History” due to his voluminous writings in the field including, as discussed below, his account of the first centuries of Christianity in his “Ecclesiastical History” or “Church History“.
Church History (Ecclesiastical History):
FootnoteD
“Church History ” or “Ecclesiastical History” is the only exigent work that chronicles the development of early Christianity and its Church from the birth of Christ on into the fourth century. Eusebius’s account, written in Koiné Greek, lingua franca for the Mediterranean area from fourth century BC to fourth century AD, provides a chronological narrative, using the succession of Roman Emperors as a linear timeline, of the early Christian Church. Eusebius, with his access to the Theological Library of Caesarea, incorporated many church documents, acts of the martyrs, letters, and extracts from earlier Christian writings into his work, many which no longer exists. The “Church History” covers the succession of Church bishops, the history of Christian teachers especially Origen, the history of the many church heresies and conflicts, and Christianity’s relationships with Romans, pagans, and Jews. Despite accusations that “Church History” is more a defense of Christianity, an apologetic and hagiography, than a history, Eusebius’s work remains a valuable source for understanding early Christian history.
Below are the Maier’s chapter listings, brief descriptions, and Roman Emperors during the historical period covered.
Book I: The Person and Work of Christ: Eusebius on Christ. Augustus to Tiberius.
Book II: The Apostles: Eusebius on the Apostles. Tiberius to Nero.
Book III: Missions and Persecutions:Formation of the New Testament. Galba to Trajan.
Book IV: Bishops, Writings, and Martyrdoms: Defenders and Defamers of the Faith. Trajan to Marcus Aurelius.
Book V: Western Heros, Eastern Heretics: Death at Lyons, Rome, and Alexandria. Marcus Aurelius to Septimius Severus.
Book VI: Origen and Atrocities at Alexandria: Life of Origen. Septimius Severus to Decius.
Book VII: Dionysius and Dissent: Church Life According to Dionysius. Gallus to Diocletian.
Book VIII: The Great Persecution: Edicts Against Christians. Diocletian to Galerius.
Book IX: The Great Deliverance: The End of Persecution? Maximin, Maxentius, and Constantine.
Book X: Constantine and Peace: Eusebius and Constantine. Constantine.
Literary Criticism:
In C.F. Cruse’s 1850 translation of “Ecclesiastical History” he states that, “…Eusebius was not without his beauties, but they were rarely scattered, that we can hardly allow him an eminent rank as a writer.” This is an understatement of the 19th century although it is a polite way to admit Eusebius was incapable of engaging his readers in any form other than pedantic verbosity. This is also an example that Cruse was not immune from obfuscating meaning in his written translations and commentary. His comment above simply stated that Eusebius rarely wrote with elegance and concision. Eusebius’ writing was dense, confusing, dogmatic, and sometimes incomprehensible. Eusebius’ writing compares favorably, snark intended, with Edward Gibbons’ “The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire” whose erudite, verbose, and opaque style has managed to confuse his readers for two plus centuries now, but for some reason no one seems to mind, except me. Gibbons disliked, immensely, Eusebius’ “Ecclesiastical History” stating that it was full of lies and falsehoods which is an exceedingly difficult position to support due to Eusebius’ excessive use, usually in quotes, of original source material. Gibbons blamed the fall of the Roman Empire on the rise of Christianity, a problematic thesis considering Christianity was the least of the Empires worries. Unchecked immigration and a corrupt governing class were much bigger problems than a few Christians asking to be left alone to worship their God in peace.
Paul L. Maier’s translation of “Church History” is a masterful improvement over C.F. Cruse’s 1850 attempt to make Eusebius readable. Cruse strove to accurately translate Eusebius with the result of burdening his readers with difficult and cluttered phrasing. Maier saves his readers by reducing Eusebius’s lengthy sentences, dense language, and abrupt subject changes to intelligible bites of prose that are readable, understandable, and usable. An example of Maier taking difficult sentences and distilling them into something cogent can be seen in the two example sentences below. The first sentence comes from Loeb’s edition of “Ecclesiastical History“, which is a very faithful rendition of Eusebius’ writing, followed by Maier’s translated version. Loeb: “I have already summarized the material in the chronological tables which I have drawn up, but nevertheless in the present work I have undertaken to give the narrative in full detail.” Maier:“Previously I summarized this material in my Chronicle but in the present work I deal with it in the fullest detail.” The first sentence takes a few readings to comprehend the meaning. Maier allows for instant comprehension.
“Ecclesiastical History” or “Church History” is an important work in understanding the beginnings of Christianity and the governing hierarchy that was built up over the centuries. This is not a long book, less than four hundred pages, but it does take dedication to the task of reading and understanding it. In the end it is worth the effort as a little history is always useful if not enlightening.
References and Readings:
Eusebius. By Allan Miller. Wikipedia. 2001 (2024 Update)
James Gleick left Harvard in 1976 with a degree in English and a disposition towards independence from the 9 to 5. His initial attempt at independence after college was launching a weekly newspaper in the midwest city of Minneapolis, Minnesota. This endeavor ended in failure within a year, and it would take another 10 years before he could leave his day job, succeeding as an author of history of science and a provider of internet service in New York City.
His first book, Chaos: Making a New Science, was critically acclaimed and a million copy best seller establishing Gleick as a first-rate storyteller of difficult subjects to the lay public. He wrote two other bestsellers, both biographies, Genius: The Life and Science of Richard Feynman in 1992 and Isaac Newton nine years later.
Gleick presents Newton’s life in chronological order, painting a beautiful portrait of his acheivements but also imparting a sense of his being as a human. His accomplishments were beyond exceptional, but his temperament was that of a reluctant member of society at large, not easily befriended, easy to offend, and not quick to forgive. Current hypotheses suggest that Newton may have suffered from Asperger’s Syndrome, one of the milder forms of autism. As a social being he appears a lot like Beethoven, also a genius but also without grace or courtesy.
Issac Newton was born fatherless, on Christmas Day in 1642 according to the Julian calendar, still in use in England at the time, or the less interesting 4 January 1643 by the today’s Gregorian calendar, on a sheep farmstead far north of London in Lincolnshire County. His father died about three months before his birth and in three years he was shuffled off to a grandmother’s care for the next 9 years to keep him away and out of site from his mother’s new husband, Reverend Barnabas Smith. His early education was at the ancient King’s School, already more than two hundred years old when he entered in 1655 and still operates as an all-boys grammer school to this day. Upon finishing at King’s School, he entered Trinity College at Cambridge in 1661 and, except for a year away in 1665, he stayed as a student and professor until 1696. Immediately following Cambridge, he became Warden of the King’s Mint and in 1703 became president of the Royal Society and stayed in that position until he died in 1727.
Newton’s contributions to the world were many and varied. His Three Laws of Motion were revolutionary in the 18th century, and as a testament to their lasting correctness are still taught to every school kid early in their education. The Law of Gravitation explained the orbit of the heavenly bodies and why apples fall and not rise, float, or go sideways. It has since been replaced by Einstein’s General Relativity but is still a particularly good approximation for us lessor mortals. Calculus. Enough said.
Newton also intensely studied the bible, believing that the universe could only exist through the existence of God. He rejected the Trinity believing there is one God, God the Father with Jesus and the Holy Spirit subservient to God. Newton also predicted that the end of times would not come before 2060, 38 short years from now. Still a little early to be maxing out your credit cards.
Newton researched and experimented with alchemy, including looking for the Philosophers Stone and the force that keeps the planets in their orbits. Seeking the Philosophers Stone may have been worthy of Harry Potter but I’m not sure about Newton. Newton never published anything on his alchemy studies, likely because it didn’t make any sense. Now looking for the force that kept planets from falling your head during a walk-in park was worthy of Newton and the rest of the world, especially Einstein. Newton found it and it was called gravity.
My one complaint with Gleick’s book is his derisive commenting on Newton’s fascination with alchemy through today’s lens of knowledge rather than accepting that understanding and meaning in this world changes, sometimes for the better, sometimes not. People respond to the time they live in not to the unknowns of the future. Newton put it this way, “What we know is a drop, what we don’t know is an ocean.” and one can only study the drop that he has.
One of my favorite quotes of Newton or anyone for that matter was, “A man may imagine things that are false, but he can only understand things that are true.” I liked this quote when I first saw it, not because it was profound, it was, but because it was an idea I had promulgated early on in my education, if it didn’t make logical sense, it probably was wrong.
Written by: Francesco Contaldo, Raffaele Mertes, Gianmario Pagano
Music by: Marco Frisina
Cast: Richard Harris, Vittoria Belvedere, Benjamin Sadler, Bruce Payne
Film Locations: NA
Budget: $ NA Low-Budget, Made for TV
Worldwide Box Office: $ NA
St. John, John the Apostle, John the Evangelist, John of Patmos, John the Elder (Harris) is held in the Aegean island prison of Patmos as a scribe for his Roman jailers. God speaks to John and commands him to disseminate, as letters, the visions he sends him. The letters are be sent to the 7 churches of Asia Minor. The visions include truths and admonishment to the churches and how the beginning of the end of times will transpire.
This is a made for TV movie that exhibits its low-budget pedigree in almost every scene. But the movie wasn’t made to garner any awards, rather it was made to educate the public about the Book of Revelations, the last book of the Bible. It does accomplish this but the story is out of sequence and the method is clunky and amateurish.
The supporting actors are all bad with the atrocious acting trophy going to the Bruce Payne playing the Roman Emperor Domitian. Moving from bad to worse, the special effects were categorically dreadful. If there is an award for worst special effects this movie would win. The movie’s effects were on par with what passed as realistic in the 1958 movie: The 7th Voyage of Sinbad the Sailor. Spending a few dollars more on marginally better special effects very likely would have taken this movie from ugh awful to mildly entertaining.
The only true shining light in this movie is Richard Harris, he can’t save the movie, but he is a joy to watch. The kindly Dumbledore persona comes through in every scene. A natural teacher with a gentle soul. Interestingly, his full name is Richard St John Harris.
elsToday 