The 1961 American epic religious film King of Kings is excellent in many ways but could have been better. Mostly adapted from the New Testament, it makes many detours from the source material.

For whatever reason it begins in 63 BC, around 63 years before Christ was born or 59 years if one accepts estimates that He was really born in 4 BC. Presumably it is supposed to show how the Jews were oppressed by Rome and why they longed for a Messiah to free them.

I usually detail plot before listing objectionable content, but this film starts out gory and pretty well keeps it up, with numerous battles and massacres. One of the opening scenes is of Roman soldiers spearing priests at the Temple in Jerusalem, and it continues in that manner. In one particularly impressive instance, a man is speared and then held aloft on the end of the spear. There is also later, of course, the slaughter of the innocents following the birth of Jesus, as King Herod, played by Grégoire Aslan, seeks to destroy what is heralded as a new Messiah to the Jews. (My mom always cried at these scenes.)

The action then proceeds to the birth of Jesus. A not very satisfactory Nativity scene emphasizes the three Wise Men and leaves out the shepherds entirely, who arrived before the Wise Men and are arguably more significant, with Jesus being the Good Shepherd.

Much of the movie is devoted to a Roman soldier named Lucius of Cyrene, played by Ron Randell. Lucius encounters Jesus at various points. He meets the 12-year-old Jesus and wonders how a Jewish boy born in Bethlehem escaped being killed as an infant. He is later impressed by the adult Jesus.

At last the adult Jesus, played by Jeffrey Hunter, appears on the scene. His striking blue eyes are perhaps out of place for a Middle Eastern native, but after all no one knows what God looks like and Jesus could have taken after his Father. Hunter is pretty good with what he is given to do, which is not enough. A few scenes from Bible stories are enacted and others are merely mentioned by the other characters who take over the movie. A number of scenes not in the Bible are added. Either the moviemakers were determined to make a sprawling epic or they didn’t trust Hunter to carry the film, but for whatever reason it is not very Christ centered. It also is very long and tends to drag at times.

One very good scene not featuring Jesus is the dance of Salomé, played by Brigid Bazlen. She really puts on a show which is well worth seeing.

Two contributors who were robbed were Ray Bradbury, who wrote the film’s brilliant narration, and Orson Welles, who delivered the narrative stunningly. Sadly, neither were credited. Here is a sample: “They but knew the waters of Galilee, the shores and fields beyond. But knowing this, they were most rare, simple and precious. For they were the pure in heart and but needed instruction.” This beautiful passage conveys well the love of Jesus for his followers and humanity in general, but it does seem to slip in a little Humanism. What happened to the Christian doctrine that everyone except Jesus (and his mother, according to Catholics) is born sinful and Jesus was sent to save them?

Royal Dano is very good as Peter. This makes at least two projects featuring Ray Bradbury and Orson Welles, the other being Moby-Dick, and three featuring Ray Bradbury and Royal Dano, the other two being Moby-Dick and Something Wicked This Way Comes.

My advice is to give this a chance but not to miss the 1927 original, The King of Kings. This classic features great scenes like Jesus trashing the money changers’ setup in the Temple. Other scenes are extremely touching and well done, and overall it is not only more Christ centered but a better film.