Gene Fedorov This is the most inconsistent interpretation of JCS I ever seen and heard. While there were some aspects that I admired, there were others where I just couldn't help but turn away from the screen in disgust.The instrumental part was great throughout, much better than in the "original" Jewison's film. Especially the lower spectrum of the musical score has been captured very well, adding a new dimension to the sound. I have no complains about the the stage settings, light, camera work and overall directorship either -- although debatable, they were done professionally. The actors performances, on the other hand... are a different story.Jerome Pradon. I haven't heard of this actor before, but his expert performance made me a fan overnight. He's head and shoulders above the rest of the cast. Intelligence, drama, subtlety – he has it all covered. Here's one of the highlights: during "Hosanna" he keeps his usual sarcastic, thoughtful demeanor ("Enjoy this nonsense while you can... because it will get us into trouble soon"), until the moment the crowd shouts at Jesus: "Will you DIE for me?" Immediately upon catching the meaning, he jumps into full alert mode, first scanning the crowd to locate the source of the threat ("Someone wants to hurt my friend. They'll have to deal with me first."), then realizes that nothing can be done, gives bewildered Jesus a meaningful glance ("Didn't I try to tell you it would come to this? And you didn't want to listen?"), studies his face intently, thinks he read an answer to his unspoken question, smiles weakly ("You still don't. Who am I to you... Even if I give you my life, I can't save you from yourself... how ironic"), then turns away and sinks back into his sad thoughts. This whole scene is so full of psychological nuances and is so expertly played that, despite lasting only few seconds, is completely unforgettable. There are many other moments where Pradon's acting is just as brilliant. His singing is good, just not as good as his acting. It's very expressive. He seems quite a capable singer, I only wish his voice didn't crack ALL the time. This is a minor complain, though. Overall, if the film is worth watching at all, that's because of him.Renee Castle is lovable and sings well, although she is not very convincing as Magdalene. "So calm, so cool, no lover's fool" -- she appears exactly the opposite of her self-assessment, always looking too vulnerable, young and naive for an experienced former prostitute. Even considering her love might have affected her personality, at certain moments her past must have gotten the upper hand, especially when she had to deal with Judas' harassment.Caifas: As a singer, complete disaster. He can't sing in profondo range, no matter how hard he tries. Unfortunately, he tries repetitively, poor man, much to his embarrassment. I wonder why he didn't switch to an upper octave, or better yet, admitted it just wasn't his part and walked away. Since I had to skip forward, unable to bear his so called singing, I can't comment on this actor's performance.Michael Shaeffer. Screeching voice, menacing looks, a maniac in the flesh. The only problem, I don't think Annas was a maniac. If he's a villain, I envision him as a more cunning and subtle one.Fred Johanson. In his acting he is grossly, freakishly over the top, as if on a verge of a mental breakdown or performing in some sort of a parody of the original (think of "Spaceballs"). As for his singing -- this was the first time in my life when I wanted to puke at the first part of a musical phrase ("cluttering UPPPP!!!!!"... ugh) and liked the second part of it ("my haaall - waay"). Overall, his performance left me sad. Pilate deserves to be taken more seriously.Tony Vincent. Acting nonexistent. So what if he's supposed to represent a hardened extremist revolutionary? That's probably too much to ask from a "cutie" who can actually sing and dance.Rik Mayall. I actually liked his grotesque presentation. Indeed, he looked funny and menacing at the same time, quite fitting Herod's part. Unfortunately, his total inability to control his voice, which even topped that of Caifas', forced me to watch him with muted sound.Finally, Glenn Carter. Judging by his performance, I am not convinced that he is an actor at all. His depiction of Christ is pathetic and insulting. His acting is melodramatic in the worst possible sense. At one point, when he was going to pieces on the floor yet again, I literally felt nauseous and had to look away from the screen until he finished his act. His attempts to put a meaningful expression on his face were just as painful to watch. There were moments where he smiled, or frowned his brow, or made some other (usually irrelevant) grimace; but he seemed most comfortable keeping his face totally blank, as if recently treated with BOTOX. Not a single thought more complex than "now I must look sad / angry" or "just watch me... exercise my upper falcetto range" managed to surface in his eyes, either. Basically, he acted like an animated mannequin, a puppet, although maybe not as innocent as Pilate called him. Associating him with the protagonist even for a second? You gotta be kidding... Some say his performance presents Jesus as more human-like than Ted Neeley's. In my opinion, Terminator is more human-like than Carter's Jesus. His singing seemed orders of magnitude better than his acting. I guess I was so distracted by his abysmal acting that I couldn't give his singing the attention it probably deserved.Out of total five: three for the instrumental part, three for directing and camera work, four to Pradon, one to Castle, minus two to Carter, minus four to the rest of the cast.

wolfshead56 I ran across this on TV last night and thought it was the 73 version. While I didn't think the movie held a candle to the play when I saw it many moons ago there wasn't much on and thought I would give it another chance. As this went on I thought, I don't remember it being this bad. Then I saw it was the 2000 version not the 73. Not even going to go in to the acting. It's a musical and if the music don't work then all the acting in the world can't save it and this music not only didn't work, it was on strike. Half the voices were so high pitched I wondered if the singers were huffing helium before their numbers. Was there a special on sopranos during casting? Even when a good voice was found the arrangements were god awful. Instead of the songs flowing smoothly it seemed that every line in a number of songs was chopped off, as if it was being spoken at the end rather than sung. I grew up in the JCS era and still have my original vinyl stored away and am sure that the 40 year old record would still have a smoother tone than the songs in this show.

ivyingreen Maybe it's because this was the first version I've seen (I've only watched specific songs from the 1973 version to compare) but I love it! I'm Jewish, so I'm not that invested in the story of Jesus and whether it's blaspheme or not, so I can just enjoy it for what it is: A great story with fascinating characters.I love the modernization of the story- I love the "Simon Zealotes" scene with the machine guns, I love the outfits, I love Herod's cheesy number, I love all of it. I think it's a great idea and makes it more accessible for it's current audience.I found Carter's Jesus more human and likable than the one from 1973. I love seeing him get angry, happy, tormented, tired...I love seeing his fear in "would you die for me" and the looks he exchanges with Judas throughout the whole thing- it really speaks volumes.I loved Peter and Mary's "Could we start again" duet, I think their voices are better (and mesh better) than the 1973 version and while I think Simon looked a bit too much like a "boy band", I liked "Simon Zealotes" more than that crazy dancing in 1973 that I wasn't sure if I was amused or scared by. I think Mary over-acted a few scenes, but she's got a gorgeous voice and is very sensual.Which brings me to Judas. Now I'll admit- Carl in 1973 has a better voice (apparently Jerome Pradon is a Baritone singing Tenor in this) but this Judas has completely won me over. The reactions, acting, emotions- he's so wonderful I completely fell for his Judas. Even when Pradon's singing got a bit too high for him, his acting more than made up for it IMHO. I keep re-watching scenes with him and catching little gestures and expressions- especially in the scenes between him and Jesus. It doesn't hurt that I found him completely hot, mind you!The Priests were creepy, even if Caiaphas went a bit too low for his own good. Annas I found was extremely creepy and disturbing- so well done! Pilate I found was interesting. Sometimes I had to laugh at his expressions and over-enunciating, but then again, sometimes he moved me- like the tears he had in his eyes in "Pilate's dream".All and all I highly recommend this, if you come with an open mind. The first time I saw this it was a bit weird, but the second time I started getting obsessed with it.

Tekla-too I'm sorry, but this version of Jesus Christ Superstar is to me SO inferior to the original 1973 version that I couldn't even bear to watch the whole thing -- from the singing to the acting.Besides, it is pure folly to remake a film that is a BRILLIANT as the 1973 version. I checked this out at the library by mistake, thinking it was the original version.I didn't watch the whole thing, but I can tell you that the actors/singers that played Judas, Jesus, Mary Magdelene, Herod, Ciaphas (sp) and others in the ORIGINAL were stupendous. Not so here. I would not exchange even one of those actors from the original.I can't imagine why they even tried to remake this film. All that said, I give the ORIGINAL version 10 stars out of 10, (yes, it's that good!) -- and this one gets 3 stars. Sorry.