Luther

2003

Action / Biography / Drama / History

10
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Rotten45%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright74%
IMDb Rating6.61015441

churchcatholicismprotestant church

Plot summary


Uploaded by: FREEMAN

Director

Top cast

Joseph Fiennes Photo
Joseph Fiennes as Martin Luther
Alfred Molina Photo
Alfred Molina as John Tetzel
Peter Ustinov Photo
Peter Ustinov as Frederick the Wise
Jonathan Firth Photo
Jonathan Firth as Girolamo Aleander
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
1.11 GB
1280*714
English 2.0
PG-13
24 fps
2 hr 3 min
P/S 0 / 5
2.28 GB
1920*1072
English 5.1
PG-13
24 fps
2 hr 3 min
P/S 0 / 4

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by ccthemovieman-19 / 10

Surprisingly Faithful Account

Wow, here's an oddity: a modern-day film faithful to theological history, an uncompromising biography of Martin Luther.

Knowing the film world, I doubt this film was made to glorify God. It probably was made more to make the Roman Catholic church look bad, or to glorify a rebel and a man of the people: "the peoples' liberation" as the back cover of the DVD states.

Whatever the motive, it stays true to history and it's nice to see that for a change. To those unfamiliar with Luther, he was the founder of the Protestant denomination. Luther was monk who saw and heard things he thought were unscriptural and broke off from the Catholic Church in "protest." Hence, the "Protestant" church was formed.

Anyway, not only was the story done well, so was the cinematography. This is one gorgeous movie to ogle, well-filmed with high production values. The scenery, sets and costumes are all first-rate.

Joseph Fiennes (Luther) is a bit wimpy-looking but his character certainly isn't. As the subject of indulgences and other practices begin to transform Luther's ideas of what Jesus' church should be, the story grows in intensity as Luther gets pressured by the Catholic hierarchy as his protest issues become public.

What happens to him and to the masses because of his actions are revealed in pretty dramatic form. Obviously the story is far more complex than two hours can give it but the filmmakers did a pretty good job condensing it to make the time constriction.

Notes: This was Peter Ustinov's last movie. On the DVD, being that is was a fairly expensive one, I am surprised there were no "extras." In all, however, a solid film but it will definitely offend Roman Catholics.

Reviewed by lee_eisenberg7 / 10

as it was, Martin Luther wasn't the first religious rebel of the era

I had known for some years about Martin Luther nailing the theses to the church. Until I had seen the movie "Luther", I hadn't really known anything about the rest of his life (except that he was a notorious anti-Semite). The movie does a pretty good job showing the events that led up to his famous deed and then what resulted. Granted, they can't show everything, and I can't verify how accurate the movie is, but I will assert that the movie marks a major achievement for all involved. I just find it fascinating to learn about the circumstances surrounding these historical events. Speaking of which, I learned in ninth grade that there had been several rebellions against the Catholic Church prior to Luther's famous action; it was just that the theses-nailing was something that everyone could follow easily.

Anyway, certainly worth seeing. Starring Joseph Fiennes, Peter Ustinov (in his final role) and Bruno Ganz.

PS: the book "Non Campus Mentis: World History According to College Students" says: "An angry Martin Luther nailed ninety-five theocrats to a church door. The pope's response was to declare Luther hereditary...Martin Luther King stood for the priesthood of all relievers."

Reviewed by bkoganbing9 / 10

God's Word Is For All

Exactly fifty years earlier Martin Luther got himself an autobiographical film that starred Niall McGinniss and got great critical acclaim. With better production values, color, and an impeccably cast group of players this story of the founder of one of the sects of Protestantism is destined to be a classic.

In the review I did of the earlier film I noted that Martin Luther was one of many founders of Protestantism. His Lutheran church became the majority faith of northern Germany, the low countries and of Scandinavia. Other folks like John Calvin in Switzerland, John Knox in Scotland, and even Henry VIII in England all can claim some credit for the Protestant Reformation.

I think Luther's legacy in the political sphere may be a bit more unassailable. That other German, Johannes Von Guttenberg, may have invented the printing press and used to print a Bible, but Luther had the Bible translated in his native tongue of German. That book was a declaration of political as well as spiritual independence from Rome.

As the previous film had to observe the Code, this version of Luther took us into young Martin's spiritual journey and what might have repelled him from the Catholic faith when he first went to Rome to study. The Papacy was at its lowest ebb at that time, it was a prize to be bargained for among the rich Italian families like the Borgias and the Medicis. Salvation was for sale, a contribution to the church could buy your way to a good afterlife. My favorite scene in the film is the young priest Luther in a sermon talking about all the relatives he bought or is planning to buy from the devil in hell.

Luther also disdained the idea of a celibate clergy. In that one he certainly was ahead of his times. My own feeling is that part of the reason the Catholic Church today insists on the celibate priesthood is that they don't want to appear to be giving into one of Luther's main tenets.

Joseph Fiennes makes a passionate Luther, a man willing to risk all for the sake of his new found faith. Which is an unshakable belief that faith alone insures salvation, that no human intercession by priest or Pope is necessary and that it follows that the Word of God is not something spoon fed to people by a clergy reading it from an ancient language that they alone know.

Luther was not the first religious reformer, but what kept him from being burned at the stake like others was the protection of the Duke of Saxony played here by Peter Ustinov. Luther turned out to be Ustinov's final theatrical film. Playing the cultured and politically attuned Duke, Ustinov goes out with one of his best big screen performances.

The less attractive aspects of Luther's character are left out of the film, his misogyny, his sexism, his raging anti-Semitism. As he got older, Luther suffered from a variety of health issues that made him a nasty tempered fellow. His later writings certainly reflect that.

Our film ends with the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V having to deal with a whole gang of new Protestant states in the German portion of his realm in 1530. This was due to Luther and as I said before, Luther's legacy may be more political than spiritual.

Luther is not only good entertainment, it's very good history and that's an unbeatable combination.

Read more IMDb reviews