Wikipedia

The Gospel According to St. Matthew (film)

(Redirected from Il Vangelo secondo Matteo)

The Gospel According to St. Matthew (Italian: Il Vangelo secondo Matteo) is a 1964 epic biblical drama film, written and directed by Pier Paolo Pasolini. It is a cinematic rendition of the story of Jesus according to the Gospel of Matthew, from the Nativity through the Resurrection.

The Gospel According to Matthew
Original Italian release poster
ItalianIl Vangelo secondo Matteo
Directed byPier Paolo Pasolini
Screenplay byPier Paolo Pasolini
Based onGospel of Matthew
Produced byAlfredo Bini
Starring
    • Enrique Irazoqui
    • Margherita Caruso
    • Susanna Pasolini
    • Marcello Morante
    • Mario Socrate
    • Settimio Di Porto
CinematographyTonino Delli Colli
Edited byNino Baragli
Music byLuis Enríquez Bacalov
Production
companies
Arco Film
Lux Compagnie Cinématographique
Distributed byTitanus Distribuzione (Italy)
Lux Compagnie Cinématographique (France)
Release dates
  • 4 September 1964 (1964-09-04) (Venice)
  • 2 October 1964 (1964-10-02) (Italy)
  • 3 March 1965 (1965-03-03) (France)
Running time
137 minutes[1]
CountriesItaly
France[2]
LanguageItalian

In the neorealist tradition, the film employed a cast of mostly amateur actors, and was filmed entirely on-location throughout Southern Italy. The dialogue is taken directly from the Gospel of Matthew, as Pasolini felt that "images could never reach the poetic heights of the text."[3] He reportedly chose Matthew's Gospel over the others because he felt "John was too mystical, Mark too vulgar, and Luke too sentimental."[4]

The Gospel According to St. Matthew premiered on 4 September 1964 at the 25th Venice International Film Festival, where it won the Grand Jury Prize and three Nastro d'Argento Awards, including Best Director. It was nominated for three Oscars—Best Art Direction, Best Costume Design and Best Score. In 2015, the Vatican City newspaper L'Osservatore Romano called it the best film on Christ ever made.[5] The film is considered a classic of world cinema and the neorealist genre.[6]

Plot

edit

Note: The film lacks a conventional narrator, and assumes (or at least benefits from) familiarity with the story of Christ.[7][8]

In Roman Galilee, the local Jewish community lives in poverty. Although the Romans are formally in charge, the Jewish upper class—including King Herod and the Pharisee religious elite—dominates the locals on a day-to-day basis.

The pregnant Mary has a troubled relationship with Joseph, who worries she cheated on him. Joseph reconciles with Mary after an angel tells him that God caused Mary's pregnancy.[a] After Mary bears Jesus Christ, the magi visit the baby Jesus. The angel tells the family to flee to Egypt. Herod—who fears a prophecy that Jesus will become king of the Jews—brutally massacres the region's infants. The family return to Judea after Herod dies.[b]

Many years later, John the Baptist preaches a brazenly anti-establishment message to the commoners of Galilee.[c] Jesus visits John to be baptized, and God appears to them.[d] Satan offers Jesus wealth and power, but Jesus declines.[e]

Jesus recruits a band of disciples.[f] He warns them that "I came not to bring peace, but a sword" and that they will suffer on his behalf.[g] He travels around the country with his disciples, healing the blind, raising the dead, exorcising demons, and proclaiming the arrival of the Kingdom of God and the promised salvation.[h] The film rapidly canvasses his parables and sayings, including the Sermon on the Mount, in a series of montaged monologues.[i] Meanwhile, the new king imprisons John the Baptist before capriciously executing him to impress his stepdaughter.[j]

Jesus is generally uncomfortable showing his divine power in public (with the exception of the miracle of the loaves and fishes).[k] He prefers to preach radical messages to working-class crowds and children.[l] The wealthy are alienated by Jesus's socially conscious teachings, the religious elite are threatened by his contempt for their legalism and hypocrisy, and even commoners are concerned with his asceticism.[m] Matthew is wounded when Jesus chooses Peter over him to lead the church, but accepts Jesus's decision.[n]

Although the public—which wants to see the supernatural—initially ignores Jesus,[o] he attracts a large following and triumphantly enters Jerusalem to cheering crowds.[p] The Roman army is called in for crowd control and beats several followers of Jesus.

After Jesus claims to be the Jews's prophesied Messiah, the chief priests plot to murder him.[q] Judas Iscariot betrays Jesus after Jesus scolds him in front of the other disciples.[r] During the Agony in the Garden, Jesus accepts his fate, which he has long known.[s] The chief priests organize a mob to arrest Jesus. The apostles rise to defend him, but Jesus insists on surrendering peacefully.[t] The chief priests hand Jesus over to the Romans.[u] Fearing a similar fate, Peter denies Jesus three times. After escaping, he breaks down crying.[v] Judas commits suicide after realizing even the priests are disgusted by his treachery.[w]

The Roman governor, Pilate, declares Jesus innocent but executes him anyway to placate the chief priests.[x] Mary buries her son.[y] After three days, Jesus rises from the dead and instructs his disciples to spread the gospel throughout the world.[z]

Cast

edit

Production

edit

Background

edit

According to Barth David Schwartz's book Pasolini Requiem (1992), the impetus for the film took place in 1962. Pasolini had accepted Pope John XXIII's invitation for a new dialogue with non-Catholic artists, and subsequently visited the town of Assisi to attend a seminar at a Franciscan monastery there. The papal visit caused traffic jams in the town, leaving Pasolini confined to his hotel room; there, he came across a copy of the New Testament. Pasolini read all four Gospels straight through, and he claimed that adapting a film from one of them "threw in the shade all the other ideas for work I had in my head."[9] He said that he decided to "remake the Gospel by analogy".[10]

Pasolini had the idea to not reproduce exactly a historic, casual Christ, but rather projecting the present-day society of southern Italy onto that figure, a Christ after 2,000 years of narrative build-up. As he explained,

Along with this method of reconstruction by analogy, we find the idea of myth and epics [...] so when narrating the history of Christ, I did not reconstruct Christ such as he actually was. If I had reconstructed Christ's history as it actually was, I would not have made a religious film, since I am not a believer. I do not think Christ was God's son. I would have made a positivist or Marxist reconstruction if any, so at the best of cases, a life of one of the five or six thousands saints preaching at that moment in Palestine. However, I did not want to do that, I am not interested in profanations: that is just a fashion I loathe, it is petit bourgeois. I want to consecrate things again, because that is possible, I want to re-mythologize them. I did not want to reconstruct the life of Christ as it really was, I wanted to make the history of Christ plus two thousand years of Christian storytelling about the life of Christ, since it is the two thousands years of Christian history that have mythologized this biography, one that as such would have been virtually insignificant otherwise. My film is the life of Christ after two thousands years of stories on the life of Christ. That is what I had in mind.[11]

The film was dedicated to John XXIII.[12] The announcement at the opening credits reads that it is "dedicato alla cara, lieta, familiare memoria di Giovanni XXIII" ("dedicated to the dear, joyous, familiar memory of Pope John XXIII"). Pasolini was particularly critical with the new Pope Paul VI (1963), at a moment when he was drafting a storyboard for a follow-up to the film, this time on Paul the Apostle. The project due for 1966–1967 never took off, but it was advanced.[13]

The film was co-produced by Arco Films and French company Lux Compagnie Cinématographique.[2]

Motives and blasphemy prosecution

edit

During the pre-production process, Pasolini attracted controversy when the figure of Christ appeared in his short film La ricotta, part of the omnibus film RoGoPaG. Pasolini was prosecuted and convicted of attacking the state religion (Catholicism was the sole state religion of Italy until 1984).[14] He received a suspended prison sentence. Nonetheless, he continued making the Matthew film. Pasolini was well-known for being an atheist, a homosexual, and a Marxist. It has been speculated that the real motive for his prosecution may have been to preemptively discredit him in front of Catholic audiences, in case The Gospel proved to be iconoclastic. Due to the controversy, Pasolini strengthened the disclaimer at the start of La ricotta, saying that he believed the Passion of Christ was "the greatest [story] that ever took place."[15]

At a press conference in 1966, Pasolini was asked why he, an unbeliever, had made a film which dealt with religious themes. He responded that "If you know that I am an unbeliever, then you know me better than I do myself. I may be an unbeliever, but I am an unbeliever who has a nostalgia for a belief."[16] Therefore, he sets his criticism against a backdrop of sheer religious concern for the role assumed by the Church, the organization, for centuries.[17]

Casting

edit

In Italian neorealist style, most of the actors Pasolini hired were non-professionals. Enrique Irazoqui (Jesus) was a 19-year-old economics student from Spain and a communist activist who met Pasolini through Elsa Morante. Irazoqui initially did not want to play the role for ideological reasons, but was convinced by Morante and a local leftist writer named Giorgio Manacorda [it], who told him to play a "Gramscian" Christ.[18] Irazoqui donated his entire acting salary to anti-Franco causes, and was targeted by the Falangist government upon his return to Spain for his participation in the film.[18]

For the young Mary, Pasolini hired 14-year-old Margherita Caruso. He was looking for a woman who looked "naturally 'of the people'/commoner as they say; like thousands you see, with their faded clothes ... destined to be nothing but living humility."[19] For the elderly Mary, Pasolini cast his own mother, Susanna, who had herself lost a son (Pasolini's brother, a resistance fighter during World War II).[20]

The rest of the cast were mainly locals from Barile, Matera, and Massafra, where the film was shot.[21] The cast also included noted intellectuals such as writers Enzo Siciliano, Alfonso Gatto, and Natalia Ginzburg, poet Rodolfo Wilcock, and philosopher Giorgio Agamben.

Much of the dialogue was overdubbed by professional voice actors in post-production. For example, Irazoqui was dubbed by stage and screen actor Enrico Maria Salerno.

Filming

edit

Pasolini intentionally shot the film in Italy. He visited the Holy Land but found the locations unsuitable and "commercialized."[21] In addition, he commented that Israel's landscape was simply too modern and industrialized to stand in for the time of Christ.[22] Pasolini's location scouting in the Holy Land is documented in the adjoining feature-length documentary Location Hunting in Palestine, released a year later. For Mary and Joseph's working-class home, Pasolini used the real-life cave dwellings of the Sassi di Matera.[5]

Pasolini described his experience filming The Gospel According to Matthew as very different from his previous films. He stated that while his shooting style on his previous film Accattone was "reverential," when his shooting style was applied to a biblical source it "came out rhetorical. ... And then when I was shooting the baptism scene near Viterbo I threw over all my technical preconceptions. I started using the zoom, I used new camera movements, new frames which were not reverential, but almost documentary [combining] an almost classical severity with the moments that are almost Godardian, for example in the two trials of Christ shot like 'cinema verite.' ... The Point is that ... I, a non-believer, was telling the story through the eyes of a believer. The mixture at the narrative level produced the mixture stylistically."[10]

Style

edit

Relationship with the source material

edit

Unlike previous cinematic depictions of Jesus' life, Pasolini's film does not embellish the biblical account with any literary or dramatic inventions, nor does it present an amalgam of the four Gospels (subsequent films which would adhere as closely as possible to one Gospel account are 1979's Jesus, based on the Gospel of Luke, and 2003's The Gospel of John).[10]

Every word of dialogue in the film is drawn from the Gospel of Matthew.[23] However, not every scene or inference is drawn from Matthew. For example, Matthew does not say which disciple Jesus told off during the Anointing; only John says that it was Judas (John 12). From John's detail, Pasolini draws the inference that "Jesus's manipulation of his disciples' feelings for him directly spurs Judas's betrayal."[24] The detail that Mary was present at the Crucifixion is also drawn from John, not Matthew (John 19).[25] Pasolini also focuses on scenes to which Matthew gives comparatively limited attention, such as the massacre of the innocents.[8]

Although the film's dialogue is drawn directly from the Gospel, it is not a word-for-word recreation of the text, and Pasolini took several artistic liberties. The film deletes 592 of Matthew's 1070 verses, and rearranges scenes from the narrative at least seventeen times. In particular, Pasolini omits Matthew's genealogy of Jesus, the eschatological material in chapters 24 and 25, "sixteen of Jesus' nineteen parables, and fifteen of his eighteen miracles." Christopher Fuller writes that "[t]he result is that The Gospel strips Jesus of his otherworldly status and situates him as an inhabitant of the present material world rather than the divine realm."[26] George Aichele adds that "any careful reader will see important differences between Matthew's and Pasolini's Jesuses. ... [A]lthough the movie's Jesus is undoubtedly a prophet, he has little interest in the end of the world. Like any revolutionary, he would rather change it."[8]

Anachronisms and lack of ornamentation

edit

Pasolini employed many of the techniques of Italian neorealism in the making of his film. The British Film Institute commented that the neorealist approach gave the film a "lack of awed formality and soft-focus sentiment that sets it apart from Hollywood Bible studies."[24] Due to the film's minimalist style and lack of narration, it has been said that "one must either already know the story or have a sharp eye for visual storytelling to fully understand everything that is going on."[7]

The film is not purely naturalistic; many of its key stylistic decisions were anachronistic and unconventional.[24] In addition to the original biblical source, Pasolini used references to "2,000 years of Christian painting and sculptures" throughout the film. The look of the characters is also eclectic and, in some cases, anachronistic, resembling artistic depictions of different eras (the costumes of the Roman soldiers and the Pharisees, for example, are influenced by Renaissance art, whereas Jesus' appearance has been likened to that in Byzantine art as well as the work of Expressionist artist Georges Rouault).[10] Pasolini's use of historical anachronisms would carry over to some his following films like Oedipus Rex. As the British Film Institute later put it, the point of Pasolini's culturally omnivorous and anachronistic style "was that our knowledge of Christ's life comes down to us through 2000 years of art, and it is pointless to try and pretend otherwise."[27]

The score of the film, arranged by Luis Enríquez Bacalov, is eclectic; ranging from Johann Sebastian Bach (e.g. Mass in B Minor and St Matthew Passion) to Odetta ("Sometimes I Feel Like a Motherless Child"), to Blind Willie Johnson ("Dark Was the Night, Cold Was the Ground"), to the Jewish ceremonial declaration "Kol Nidre" and the "Gloria" from the Congolese Missa Luba. Pasolini stated that all of the film's music was of a sacred or religious nature from all parts of the world and multiple cultures or belief systems.[10] Bacalov also composed several original musical tracks.

Reception

edit
Italian Prime Minister Aldo Moro and Pier Paolo Pasolini together in Venice at the premiere of the movie in 1964.

The film received mostly positive reviews from critics, including several Christian critics. Philip French called it "a noble film," and Alexander Walker said that "it grips the historical and psychological imagination like no other religious film I have seen. And for all its apparent simplicity, it is visually rich and contains strange, disturbing hints and undertones about Christ and his mission."[28]

Some left-wing film critics, however, wrote unfavorable reviews. Oswald Stack criticized the film's "abject concessions to reactionary ideology." In response to criticism from the left, Pasolini admitted that, in his opinion, "there are some horrible moments I am ashamed of. ... The Miracle of the loaves and the fishes and Christ walking on water are disgusting pietism." He also stated that the film was "a reaction against the conformity of Marxism. The mystery of life and death and of suffering – and particularly of religion ... is something that Marxists do not want to consider. But these are and have always been questions of great importance for human beings."[28] Jean-Paul Sartre reportedly told Pasolini that "Stalin rehabilitated Ivan the Terrible; Christ is not yet rehabilitated by Marxists."[29]

Noted admirers of the film include directors Andrei Tarkovsky, who called it "genius",[30] and Martin Scorsese,[31] who instructed the cast and crew of his own Biblical film The Last Temptation of Christ to view it.[32]

The Gospel According to Matthew was ranked number 10 (in 2010) and number 7 (in 2011) in the Arts and Faith website's Top 100 Films,[33] also is in the Vatican's list of 45 great films and Roger Ebert's Great Movies list.[34][29] Forty years later, Ebert remarked that The Gospel According to Matthew and The Passion of the Christ were the only two religious films he had ever seen "that really seem[] to deal with what actually happened" with Jesus's death.[35]

On Rotten Tomatoes the film has an approval rating of 92%, based on 36 reviews, and an average rating of 8.6 out of 10, with the critics consensus saying "The Gospel According to St. Matthew forgoes the pageantry of biblical epics in favor of a naturalistic retelling of the Christ story, achieving a respectful if not reverent interpretation with political verve."[6]

Awards and nominations

edit

At the 25th Venice International Film Festival, The Gospel According to Matthew was screened in competition for the Golden Lion, and won the OCIC Award and the Silver Lion. At the film's premiere, a crowd gathered to boo Pasolini but cheered him after the film was over. The film later won the Grand Prize at the International Catholic Film Office.[28]

The film was nominated for the UN Award at the 21st British Academy Film Awards.[36]

The Gospel According to Matthew was released in the United States in 1966 and was nominated for three Academy Awards: Art Direction (Luigi Scaccianoce), Costume Design (Danilo Donati), and Score.[37]

Alternate versions

edit

The 2007 Region 1 DVD release from Legend Films features a colourised, English-dubbed version of the film, in addition to the original, black-and-white Italian-language version. (The English-dubbed version is significantly shorter than the original, with a running time of 91 minutes – roughly 40 minutes shorter than the standard version.)

See also

edit

Notes

edit

References

edit
  1. ↑ "THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO MATTHEW (U)". British Board of Film Classification. 4 November 1964. Retrieved 30 December 2012.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: deprecated archival service (link)
  2. 1 2 "Lumiere".
  3. ↑ "Film as Art: Danél Griffin's Guide to Cinema". Retrieved 7 February 2016.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: deprecated archival service (link)
  4. ↑ [dead link]
  5. 1 2 "In Francis' Church Pasolini goes to heaven". Vatican Insider – La Stampa/. Rome. 22 July 2014. Archived from the original on 24 July 2014. Retrieved 9 October 2015.
  6. 1 2 The Gospel According to St. Matthew at Rotten Tomatoes
  7. 1 2 Mirus, Thomas V. (22 March 2016). "Holy Week viewing: Pasolini's Gospel According to St. Matthew". www.catholicculture.org. Retrieved 13 April 2026.
  8. 1 2 3 Aichele, George (30 January 2015). Simulating Jesus: Reality Effects in the Gospels. Routledge. pp. 63–64. ISBN 978-1-317-54531-6.
  9. ↑ Roger Ebert (14 March 2004). "The Gospel According to St. Matthew". Rogerebert.suntimes.com. Archived from the original on 20 September 2012. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
  10. 1 2 3 4 5 Wakeman. pp. 746.
  11. ↑ Martellini, Luigi (2006). Pier Paolo Pasolini; Retrato de un intelectual. Valencia: Universitat de Valencia. pp. 117–118. ISBN 978-84-370-7928-8.
  12. ↑ Thomson, Ian (23 February 2013). "Pier Paolo Pasolini: No saint". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 9 October 2015.
  13. ↑ On the new draft film, he went as follows: "The film is an extremely violent action against the Church and the Vatican, since I put together a double-sided Paul, i.e. schizophrenic, clearly dislocated into two: one is a saint [...] while the other is a priest, an ex-Pharisaic, one that retrieves his former cultural status and founds the Church. Hence my condemnation; as a mystic he is fine, it is a mystical experience like any other, respectable, I am not judging that, but I do condemn him firmly as the founder of the Church, with all the negative elements inherent to it: sexophobia, anti-Feminism, the organization, the collects, triumphalism, moralism. To sum up, all the things that have made the Church a bad thing." See Martellini, L. 2006, p. 119.
  14. ↑ Wakeman. John. World Film Directors, Volume 2. The H. W. Wilson Company. 1988. pp. 746.
  15. ↑ Power, Nina; Nowell-Smith, Geoffrey (30 March 2017). "Subversive Pasolini: La Ricotta and The Gospel According to Matthew". Verso. Retrieved 13 April 2026.
  16. ↑ "Pasolini". Cinemaseekers.com. Archived from the original on 19 August 2014. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
  17. ↑ Martellini, Luigi (2006). Pier Paolo Pasolini; Retrato de un intelectual. Valencia: Universitat de Valencia. pp. 119–120. ISBN 978-84-370-7928-8.
  18. 1 2 "È morto Enrique Irazoqui, è stato Gesù nel 'Vangelo secondo Matteo' di Pasolini". la Repubblica (in Italian). 16 September 2020. Retrieved 7 October 2025.
  19. ↑ Di Blasio, Tiziana M. (6 July 2024). "How to portray the mother of Jesus". L'Osservatore Romano. Retrieved 13 April 2026.
  20. ↑ Satta, Gloria (6 May 2024). "Cinema and the sacred; the female effect". L'Osservatore Romano. Retrieved 13 April 2026.
  21. 1 2 lchadbou-326-26592 (11 July 1965). "Sopralluoghi in Palestina per il vangelo secondo Matteo (1965)". IMDb. Retrieved 3 January 2015.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  22. ↑ Valente, Peter (22 April 2021). Essays on the Peripheries. punctum books. pp. 285–86. ISBN 978-1-953035-49-3.
  23. ↑ King, Heather (11 March 2016). "'The Gospel According to St. Matthew': A film by Pier Paolo Pasolini". Angelus (magazine). Retrieved 13 April 2026.
  24. 1 2 3 McGill, Hannah (26 March 2024). "The Gospel According to Matthew". BFI Southbank Programme Notes. Retrieved 13 April 2026.
  25. ↑ Mazur, Eric Michael (8 March 2011). Encyclopedia of Religion and Film. Bloomsbury Publishing USA. p. 348. ISBN 978-0-313-01398-0.
  26. ↑ Kupfer, Marcia Ann (2008). The Passion Story: From Visual Representation to Social Drama. Penn State Press. p. 181. ISBN 978-0-271-03307-5.
  27. ↑ Andrew, Geoff (27 February 2013). "Filming the divine: The Gospel According to Matthew". BFI. Retrieved 13 April 2026.
  28. 1 2 3 Wakeman. pp. 747.
  29. 1 2 Ebert, Roger (14 March 2004). "The Gospel According to St. Matthew Movie Review (1964)". Chicago Sun-Times. Retrieved 3 January 2015 – via RogerEbert.com.
  30. ↑ Aleksandr Lipkov; Robert Bird (1 February 1967). "The Passion According to Andrei: An Unpublished Interview with Andrei Tarkovsky". nostalghia.com. Literaturnoe obozrenie 1988, University of Chicago. pp. 74–80. Retrieved 22 March 2024. Interviewer: "What do you think about Pasolini's Gospel according to Matthew? That's also a kind of historical film." Tarkovsky: "Of course. I like the picture. I like it precisely because its director did not succumb to the temptation of interpreting the Bible. The Bible has been interpreted for two thousand years and no one can reach unanimous agreement. So Pasolini did not set himself this task, he just left the thing in the form in which it was born. Many feel that the image of a militant cruel Christ was made up by the author of the film. Not true! Read the Gospels and you will see that this was a cruel, cantankerous, irreconcilable man. Moreover with what genius was it written! On the one hand he's God and the Church has been relying on him for two thousand years, but he succumbs to doubt in the garden of Gethsemane. What could be simpler than to call for help from his father and avoid dying on the cross, but he doesn't do this. He is all back-to-front..."
  31. ↑ Nordine, Michael (5 January 2017). "Martin Scorsese Reveals Why He Never Made His Movie About Jesus in New York". IndieWire. Retrieved 7 October 2025.
  32. ↑ LMU School of Film and Television (26 February 2018). The Hollywood Masters: Willem Dafoe on The Last Temptation of Christ. Retrieved 7 October 2025 – via YouTube.
  33. ↑ "Arts & Faith Top 100: The Gospel According to Matthew". Arts & Faith. Archived from the original on 22 January 2015. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
  34. ↑ "USCCB – (Film and Broadcasting) – Vatican Best Films List". United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Archived from the original on 22 April 2012. Retrieved 3 January 2015.
  35. ↑ "Ebert and Roeper give Gibson film 'two thumbs way up'". Catholic News Agency. Retrieved 13 April 2026.
  36. ↑ "BAFTA Awards: Film in 1968". British Academy of Film and Television Arts. Retrieved 26 January 2016. for the best Film embodying one or more of the principles of the United Nations Charter in 1968
  37. ↑ Crowther, Bosley (18 February 1966). "Screen: The Life of Jesus: Pasolini's Film Opens at the Fine Arts". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 14 February 2026.

Further reading

edit
  • Bart Testa, "To Film a Gospel ... and Advent of the Theoretical Stranger," in Patrick Rumble and Bart Testa (eds.), Pier Paolo Pasolini: Contemporary Perspectives. University of Toronto Press, Inc., 1994, pp. 180–209. ISBN 0-8020-7737-4.
  • "Pasolini, Il Cristo dell'Eresia (Il Vangelo secondo Matteo). Sacro e censura nel cinema di Pier Paolo Pasolini (Edizioni Joker, 2009) by Erminia Passannanti, ISBN 978-88-7536-252-2
edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Gospel_According_to_St._Matthew_(film)&oldid=1358799951"