@JediMasteKnuzzles the plot is supposed to be taking place during biblical times. They have replaced many of the biblical themes, with modern themes to make it more understandable for modern and more younger audiences.
So can someone tell me what Jesus Christ Superstar is about? I mean obvisly its about Jesus Christ but, is it set in modern times? Biblical times? if someone could help me with that, that would be much apreciated
@JediMasteKnuzzles Theoretically it's set in Biblical times but with modern elements (such as Christ being questioned post-arrest in the manner of paparazzi) and there's a lot of meta elements also, mostly in this song. However, some productions/versions feed into the modern twist on it more than others, particularly this one. With the exception of Superstar and The Arrest, however, the actual lyrics mostly reflect the technology of the time and the rough Biblical story.
@JediMasteKnuzzles It begins with Jesus' popularity increasing and Judas voicing his concerns, then goes through Judas' betrayal, the arrest, the trial and ends with the crucifixion.
Music is still good but really not liking the setting. If your gonna put on a concert just do so.>Not really that thrilling.Rather see the 73 version brought back to Broadway.
@admirallordk I am christian, but I like this version more, because the music is better, (or so I think.) you should be afraid of people who take themselves to seriously, because those who can't laugh about themselves, can do weird things.
SOMEONE please explain to me what this is! my school is gonna do a winter play on this and i never heard of this movie.. im a christian n on this very moment i stoped this video from 20 seconds bcuz i thought it was too horrable to give a chance.. but someone explain to me how is this possible to be a musical? is it passion of the christ the musical or what?
@cbcbgirls Well, it basiclly is a musical of the point Jesus rides into Jersuleum (Hope I spelled that right) up to his death. You say this looks horrible, well you should probably watch the 1973 version instead of this. If you're wondering 'how it's possible to be a musical', you should see the original 73' version. It will answer your question. In my opinion, the original is simply beautiful. Hope this helped. :)
Call me crazy, but I like this version of the song. Don't get me wrong, I love the Carl Anderson version, but I think there's a huge difference in tone and meaning between that movie and this one. In that one, Judas seems to go to heaven at the end, and during this song is confused and beseeching. In this version, an angry Judas seems to have gone to hell, and is more sardonic and spiteful towards Jesus because he didn't listen or explain himself. Both versions are good for different reasons.
What a godawful abomination this version was. Why would anyone who actually listened to Jesus Christ Superstar portray Judas as being a worthless, sniveling jackass from beginning to end? If that's your biblical interpretation of him, fine, but that's certainly not the musical's interpretation. Why the hell would this guy-who-looks-like Quentin Tarantino version of Judas have followed Jesus in the first place?
Carl Anderson and Ted Neeley became good friends (I think he was in touch with Carl until his death) and I feel, as a professional actress, it does shows in their acting rather than the 2000 staged version which doesn't quite capture it. Although the 73 version is rather dated now, it has something unique.
i have seen both movies several times and i have to say that both are good but for very different reasons. the 1973 one is good i like the old looks and it is staged well. but i don't like judas and jesus friendship it does not lead to any true feeling for me when hes betrayed. the 2000 movie is showing everyone as judas sees them. so jesus is arrogant and the apostles more fanatical. you know he loves jesus but is afraid of and for him cause he doesnt understand jesus plans even after he dies.
This Judas is nothing but a dick until the very end. The original had a more dynamic feel to him and his reasons for betraying Jesus matched up with the actions and emotions he showed.
I knew a bunch of happy clappers that went to the more modern rendition of jesus christ superstar and they asked if I went too... Nah I went to Jesus Christ Bloody Hell. It was fucking awesome, we burnt jesus on a steak and roast potatoes and spit roast mary fuck yeah
I'm sorry, I mean no harm when I say this, but compared to the 1973 one, this is crap. But they were trough different directors' eyes, and I respect that. It amuses my Andrew Lloyd Webber thought this one was more how he pictured it. :D
both versions are great (although i like judas and simon in this one better) but fun fact: Andrew Loyd Weber said in an interview about the new one that he imagined the musical more like this one
Does Judas really care if jesus is who he is? No. He's in Hell, or, as I prefer, Heaven, and has no real interest in why Jesus has chosen his fate. he only feels the regret, masked behind this hedonistic and glamourous disguise.
Where's the deleted scene where Jesus lifts the cross and swings it like a baseball bat right into Judas face? Honestly could they have cast a worse Judas? He cant sing and he just seems pompous. RIP Carl Anderson.
Not sure a gloating Judas makes any sense - has he not just hanged himself in remorse? I preferred the 70s version where he was more like "but why, JC, why?"
"how come this seen seems like gay BSDM?" I have to ask what went through your head when you posted this? It is a modern representation of a production that is open to all sorts, Don't you think the actors and actresses involved might be a little offended by this?
The thing that sucks about this musical is that its really easy to guess the ending... very little suspense. Also, I find it a little bizarre how most the second act poor Jesus is getting the crap beaten out of him and people are dancing... kick jesus... dance... kick jesus... boom, crucify him... Its over. They should have taken some more liberty with the original story... Like why couldn't he have broken off the cross, reunited with Magdalen then gone off onto the sunset???
the 1970's are OVER it is time to let new stuff in. stop comparing them. it is apples and oranges. they are different directors interpretations of a great work of art.
wot a load of rubbish... Bring back the 70's movie, hasnt been beaten yet, carl anderson as judas n Ted Neeley as Jesus, this is so tame a version, an attempt to shock us with bdsm costumes, poor interpretation of a great story n musical.
This is kind of written to be seriousy messed up. I really like the interpretation, Judas acting like some kind of TV show host as Jesus struggles to lift the cross. It's quite moving at 3:40 , when the act drops.
I do like this version, actually. It's not something that can be understood on it's own. In this version, Judas is darker and still angry and despairing. I mean, he only completed suicide from those thoughts and they won't disappear instantly. But there are moments when the "cameras" are not on him he shows to be less mocking. And then in the final scene of the song and in the final song, he appears again...past anger and altogether more introspective.
Watched the 2000 version of Jesus Christ Superstar several times. I think they did an amazing job lifting it out of the Hippie vibe of the 70's. I liked most scenes except "Superstar." I think the director missed the boat here. Dead Judas knows the impact of Christianity on history. Judas comes back to reflect on this as well as make a statement Jesus continues to be a mystery. In this version, Judas has no perspective. He just mocks Jesus, I guess because he is still angry that Jesus used him.
It's harder to sympathize with the characters in this version. The beauty of the original is that is was a tragedy of Judas. Who are we supposed to sympathize with in this version?
ok im not trying to be a purist but almost every part of this movie comes up short compared to the 1973 one, except herod, this version's herod is a badass.
Actually, I'm french (like Pradon, you noticed). Still, my judgement is not biaised.I agree this Judas-character is harder to sympathize with. He's nowhere near a martyr.But his feelings appear to be a mix of selfishness, guilt, shame, fear for himself and his companions. He hates Jesus whose delusions of grandeur could have 'em all killed. And he hates Jesus even more for forcing him into taking such measures.But you can't deny those love glances either. This duality makes'em more human.
@TheLucbrown Congrats, my African-American friend. I'm no fan of Hitler, and I'm a white saying this.
Anyways, this Judas is COMPLETELY different from the 'ancient' version. This Judas is a snarky bastard that just came back from Hell. The 1973 Judas is a martyr who was recognized by God for allowing the plan to take place.
I think the main problem people have with the 2000 version is how the characters were characterized. It's execution was beautiful and matches indeed the typical crazy anachronisms the play should offer, but here we have a Judas that is harder to sympathize with (plus a questionable singing ability), and a Christ a little too arrogant.
I'm a 50 something year old woman who has loved the movie JCS for 35 years and I say I love the 2000 film just as much. Although they tell the same story, with almost the exact same words and basic scenes, they're two totally different movies. The new one is basically a filmed stage play, with different actors, different voices, a different feel in a different time. They're both great films, just in different ways.
Personally this version had more impact on me. Just seems to have more emotion/drama, I think partly because they are actually looking at eachother and responding to eachother... I know that the 70's version has a huge crazy fanbase that would probably murder me for actually liking the 2000 version but *shrug*
Hes an alright singer tbh but i dont like his outfit here, Whilst carl anderson when he came down with that sick outfit :D Priceless, but yeah he should have looked more heavenly
This is like Freddie Mercury in the 80s lol. Don't get me wrong I don't mind Queen, but something is just wrong with Judas being portrayed as an 80s gay rocker.
I'm sorry, but what's wrong with you people. His voice is stupid. It doesnt suit this at all. Yes hes dramatic and an alright actor but voice-wise. I think not.
All you people can say things like this isnt how its so posed to be, and its better the other way, but Andrew Lloyd Webber himself, he liked the direction (not necessarily the preformance) better in this one. He went on record as saying that as a whole, he found the original to be overall fake and cheesy.
before you criticize this version, take that into thought.
Its called artistic interpretation... Yes the original was good but this is what happens with Broadway shows they get revived with different points of view created by different people. Thats the fun part I have seen original shows and then their revival and I still love watching them. Attacking them, their creators, or their actors is just bad taste. Keep your horrid comments to yourself!
I think i like it more than the original. In my point of view the director shows how twisted is our world today and how easily if Jesus was now on earth the story would have turn into a reality for the mass media and we would loose the meaning of his words. Excellent work i really loved it.
This is such shit. I understand that interpretation is a big part of theatre, but this number is not supposed to be Judas teasing Jesus, as portrayed here. And by the way, the Judas part is just better when someone with soul can sing it, and I'm white saying that.
@BigFatTubOfLardCo maybe because you are projection your own deeply seeded sexual agenda? what indicates gay? as in homosexual? sort of a Rorschach test for you?
@BigFatTubOfLardCo I think why this seems so "gay" between Jesus and Judas is that they made them in this version close and Judas was Jesus rigth hand and Jesus hoped that Judas could be safed and be better man if he just let Jesus help him and now when Judas sang, Jesus tried to reach him again
yeeeeeeah.... the great thing about Youtube is that we can compare the 2000 revival to the 1973 film... what's sad is that the original film is so freaking great, that any other production is gonna suck rocks in comparison. I just watched this back to back with "superstar" 1973... I think they missed the point in this production... the director especially.
@garboil yes, I agree, but I think at one of the last pieces Judas acts wonderfully with his eyes, but I think Judas asked Jesus some real questions in the movie, and here it's just to fool with him...
But I love this version of Gethsemane, so much emotion!
this movie sucks, and judas sucks dcks, the classical hippie black judas had a beautifull voice and put so much passion in the acting and singing, i really believed that he was doing the right thing and doing it for his people.
this judas sucks singing, and fking jesus is just criying all the time, he makes want to vomit all over my fking screen, hes just lame.
I Love the scene where they ,take jesus away, to put him on the cross, How Jesus Cries out to judas, And judas stares at him, Such pain,Hate and worry is in his eyes.
And also. The original movie and the actual play portray Judas as being sorry and he really believed what he was doing was right and what he was told to do. I'm not religious, I only enjoy this musical because of Sir Webber, but this is a disgrace to the franchise really.
@TripeHoundRedux I don't think he's really that great at all. IMO atleast. Sorry. Drew Sarich, he's the best singer in any play/musical/opera/w.e you'll see.
Yes he did. I didn't see that sadly :( I am a huge Vampire Chronicles fan too. Just never got around to seeing it. I may just look up some of the stuff on here =P
Arian christians where are you. I like to focus more on god than the death of jesus
ANARCHYGOD2012 3 days ago
Great upload. Very sad.
colourufo 3 weeks ago
This is HORRIBLE . . . . the 1973 version is the best
5249north 1 month ago
@5249north This is HORRIBLE... which is why it's best :D
AnDahNorris 1 month ago
judas parece un payaso equilibrista arriba de la cruz
delpielago1 1 month ago
So much latex! They must have got through a shed load of talcum powder.
thishandisfine 1 month ago
@JediMasteKnuzzles the plot is supposed to be taking place during biblical times. They have replaced many of the biblical themes, with modern themes to make it more understandable for modern and more younger audiences.
freddiebrianrogerjon 2 months ago
judas isnt satan but thats what this implying. its kinda annoying
jwest112 2 months ago
i wanna remake this so the modern version doesnt suck but the original is still the best.
jwest112 2 months ago
That was a horrible Judas.
TheMichaelDenny 2 months ago
@ironicsun8 Thanks for the info
JediMasteKnuzzles 2 months ago
So can someone tell me what Jesus Christ Superstar is about? I mean obvisly its about Jesus Christ but, is it set in modern times? Biblical times? if someone could help me with that, that would be much apreciated
JediMasteKnuzzles 2 months ago
@JediMasteKnuzzles Theoretically it's set in Biblical times but with modern elements (such as Christ being questioned post-arrest in the manner of paparazzi) and there's a lot of meta elements also, mostly in this song. However, some productions/versions feed into the modern twist on it more than others, particularly this one. With the exception of Superstar and The Arrest, however, the actual lyrics mostly reflect the technology of the time and the rough Biblical story.
ironicsun8 2 months ago
@JediMasteKnuzzles It begins with Jesus' popularity increasing and Judas voicing his concerns, then goes through Judas' betrayal, the arrest, the trial and ends with the crucifixion.
ironicsun8 2 months ago
pathetic
LemmingoftheBDA2 2 months ago
Is it strange that I prefer the version we did at our high school in 2007? No other versions get close to that one.
Lennoe87 2 months ago
Feel bad for the director and whom ever else was involved in ruining this scene ... Another tragedy of perverted corrupt humanity
xplain2u 3 months ago
You know, if I can say one particular good thing about this version, the biker angels are pretty awesome.
RaineAtMidnight 3 months ago
gay judas lol
ArpeggioBear 4 months ago
they ruined the idea of judas being relatable.
bad
horrible
seems like fanfiction to me
TheD33V33 4 months ago
@TheD33V33 Lol!
Though technically Jesus Christ Superstar is Bible fanfiction in the first place XD
RaineAtMidnight 3 months ago
Music is still good but really not liking the setting. If your gonna put on a concert just do so.>Not really that thrilling.Rather see the 73 version brought back to Broadway.
Hatts02 4 months ago in playlist Jesus Christ Superstar 2000
Just saw this at StratFord Ontario. Amazing.
HellKitties 4 months ago
Is there anywhere I can get the soundtrack to this production of JCS?
MrCrowIey 4 months ago
the 1973 and 2000 are booth god.
movieman741852 4 months ago
I only wanna know where he go that red leather jacket.
eskirvin1 4 months ago
If angles dress like that then it's worth being good and going to Heaven.
christl301 4 months ago
I am not particulaly a christian but this vertion seems a tad more blaspemous than the other and generaly weird after having heard the original
admirallordk 4 months ago
@admirallordk I am christian, but I like this version more, because the music is better, (or so I think.) you should be afraid of people who take themselves to seriously, because those who can't laugh about themselves, can do weird things.
don't judge and you won't be judged.
semke11 3 months ago
Nothing will EVER beat the 1973 version!
I don't like this Judas at all! no feeling or emotion!
Carl Anderson was the one and only Judas!!
;-)
LightHope74 5 months ago
@LightHope74 actually judas was the one and only judas :P but i agree with you lol
TheMontgomerymen 4 months ago 3
@TheMontgomerymen ;-) LOL!
LightHope74 4 months ago
@TheMontgomerymen ;-) LOL!
LightHope74 4 months ago
1970 album>1973 movie>whatever this is.
iloverush123 6 months ago
I like both versions, but this is more my style
royalbelialNO1 6 months ago 17
Comment removed
hunadmin1 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
It is also grandiosus ! Great ! (like the 73' verson)
But this is more my style !
(remark from Hungary)
hunadmin1 3 months ago
Carl Anderson for life <3
Ehvera 6 months ago
Unecessarily graphic
Sanderus 6 months ago
SOMEONE please explain to me what this is! my school is gonna do a winter play on this and i never heard of this movie.. im a christian n on this very moment i stoped this video from 20 seconds bcuz i thought it was too horrable to give a chance.. but someone explain to me how is this possible to be a musical? is it passion of the christ the musical or what?
cbcbgirls 7 months ago
@cbcbgirls Well, it basiclly is a musical of the point Jesus rides into Jersuleum (Hope I spelled that right) up to his death. You say this looks horrible, well you should probably watch the 1973 version instead of this. If you're wondering 'how it's possible to be a musical', you should see the original 73' version. It will answer your question. In my opinion, the original is simply beautiful. Hope this helped. :)
stinkybeans16 7 months ago
Call me crazy, but I like this version of the song. Don't get me wrong, I love the Carl Anderson version, but I think there's a huge difference in tone and meaning between that movie and this one. In that one, Judas seems to go to heaven at the end, and during this song is confused and beseeching. In this version, an angry Judas seems to have gone to hell, and is more sardonic and spiteful towards Jesus because he didn't listen or explain himself. Both versions are good for different reasons.
supaslim 7 months ago 4
@supaslim Agree. I like the both versions but I think this one is more in the spirit of the song.
rrsthebest56 5 months ago 4
What a godawful abomination this version was. Why would anyone who actually listened to Jesus Christ Superstar portray Judas as being a worthless, sniveling jackass from beginning to end? If that's your biblical interpretation of him, fine, but that's certainly not the musical's interpretation. Why the hell would this guy-who-looks-like Quentin Tarantino version of Judas have followed Jesus in the first place?
Nightdreammare 7 months ago
Carl Anderson and Ted Neeley became good friends (I think he was in touch with Carl until his death) and I feel, as a professional actress, it does shows in their acting rather than the 2000 staged version which doesn't quite capture it. Although the 73 version is rather dated now, it has something unique.
Ghostapples 7 months ago
well all i can say is that Jesus has one heack of a dick :P
Honeybeestarify 8 months ago
i have seen both movies several times and i have to say that both are good but for very different reasons. the 1973 one is good i like the old looks and it is staged well. but i don't like judas and jesus friendship it does not lead to any true feeling for me when hes betrayed. the 2000 movie is showing everyone as judas sees them. so jesus is arrogant and the apostles more fanatical. you know he loves jesus but is afraid of and for him cause he doesnt understand jesus plans even after he dies.
janaybell 8 months ago
this is idiotic.. are we that stupid to actually find any sort of entertaining value in this? besides comedy??
boogeyman1967 8 months ago
Why is Judas so squeaky? I wanted to like this, but I can't.
johnt1thomas 8 months ago
@johnt1thomas: You and me both. It sounds like, "Squeeeeulk!"
TachieBillano 7 months ago
wow this seems like a joke compared to 73
teaha0marie 8 months ago 2
This Judas is nothing but a dick until the very end. The original had a more dynamic feel to him and his reasons for betraying Jesus matched up with the actions and emotions he showed.
Tublacan 8 months ago
I knew a bunch of happy clappers that went to the more modern rendition of jesus christ superstar and they asked if I went too... Nah I went to Jesus Christ Bloody Hell. It was fucking awesome, we burnt jesus on a steak and roast potatoes and spit roast mary fuck yeah
xDoubleHardBastardx 8 months ago
good singers, but fuck this shit.
stratosinger 8 months ago
This version is much,much better!!!
ruesselschnurpsel 8 months ago
Judas shit actor. Concentrating on his own singing, and not on expressing a message to Jesus.
a1mint 9 months ago
@a1mint Agreed. Carl Anderson genuinely looked pained and pleading as he sang his final begging question to his friend.
SillyLitleGirl 8 months ago 10
I'm sorry, I mean no harm when I say this, but compared to the 1973 one, this is crap. But they were trough different directors' eyes, and I respect that. It amuses my Andrew Lloyd Webber thought this one was more how he pictured it. :D
sunpeltsaga 9 months ago
The 1973 version was much more effective
Magic9053 9 months ago
Who plays judas he's amazin :D
RandomlyFunnygirl 9 months ago 3
Wow this fucking sucks. Anyone who actually likes this is an idiot.
TheQuiZNoKid 9 months ago
i love judas's leather jackets
shammer69er 9 months ago
looks like Judas was in love with Jesus :-)
Jukume 10 months ago
How can you make a film about Jesus without the resurrection?
FuroraCeltica 10 months ago
@FuroraCeltica
I thought jsc was more about Judas. And hist story ends there.
onlyBubblz 9 months ago
1975's version is better
MegaRedfox101 10 months ago
@MegaRedfox101 1973 :-)
Magic9053 9 months ago
@Magic9053 yea sorry 1973 :-)
MegaRedfox101 9 months ago
both versions are great (although i like judas and simon in this one better) but fun fact: Andrew Loyd Weber said in an interview about the new one that he imagined the musical more like this one
TheSnake1987 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3:24-3:26 BEST PART of the whole scene! "AhHhHhH!" This guys's AWESOME!
PricelessSummerBoy 10 months ago
3:25-3:27 "AhHhHhH" BEST PART of the whole scene! This guy's fucking awesome.
PricelessSummerBoy 10 months ago
Judas is the best looking balding man ever! :D
kougarberri 10 months ago 3
2000 Version is GREAT BY NEWER, mor MODERNIZED REMAKE
cseaavalosroger 10 months ago
Once I get used to this huy's voice, i love it. Certainly not a classic singer voice, but there's something intruiging about it
rentluvr2078 10 months ago
Awful. I am so scared. Where is Carl Anderson and who is this joker playing Jesus?!?! This is an abomination.
donnalinderman 10 months ago
Judas didn't go to hell and carl anderson was better
KevsRealRandomtalk 10 months ago
Hoorrible.Actors costumes etc.Way to fuck up a good show.I hope Jesus kills you for thisSSSSOOOOO bad..
BungaSan 10 months ago
Hoorrible.Actors costumes etc.Way to fuck up a good show.I hope Jesus kills you for this.
BungaSan 10 months ago
Does Judas really care if jesus is who he is? No. He's in Hell, or, as I prefer, Heaven, and has no real interest in why Jesus has chosen his fate. he only feels the regret, masked behind this hedonistic and glamourous disguise.
witness124 10 months ago
gas
sosoriot 10 months ago
this is shit! I only recognize the 70s version.
emilianoj79 10 months ago 2
Wakatela!!!!!
jscv28 10 months ago
Isn't Judas a hell of a lot like Freddie Mercury in this scene?
kpmarion 10 months ago
@kpmarion wash your mouth for using the name of Freddie like that!
rikblein 10 months ago
Where's the deleted scene where Jesus lifts the cross and swings it like a baseball bat right into Judas face? Honestly could they have cast a worse Judas? He cant sing and he just seems pompous. RIP Carl Anderson.
ImAllinDark 10 months ago 2
the hell is this?
monkeyducks123 10 months ago
JSC is like one of the best musicals in the world. They turned it into an sm-club. "Artistic freedom", is that?
xMissRadcliffe 11 months ago 2
@xMissRadcliffe JCS, that is xD Sorry.
xMissRadcliffe 11 months ago
Not sure a gloating Judas makes any sense - has he not just hanged himself in remorse? I preferred the 70s version where he was more like "but why, JC, why?"
beckfiddler 11 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
"how come this seen seems like gay BSDM?" I have to ask what went through your head when you posted this? It is a modern representation of a production that is open to all sorts, Don't you think the actors and actresses involved might be a little offended by this?
blackniteraven 11 months ago
@EddieLandsberg
What excactly do you mean? "Taken some more liberty...?"
anlee617 11 months ago
The thing that sucks about this musical is that its really easy to guess the ending... very little suspense. Also, I find it a little bizarre how most the second act poor Jesus is getting the crap beaten out of him and people are dancing... kick jesus... dance... kick jesus... boom, crucify him... Its over. They should have taken some more liberty with the original story... Like why couldn't he have broken off the cross, reunited with Magdalen then gone off onto the sunset???
EddieLandsberg 11 months ago
WHEN WILL PEOPLE STOP LIVING IN THE PAST
the 1970's are OVER it is time to let new stuff in. stop comparing them. it is apples and oranges. they are different directors interpretations of a great work of art.
uffm 11 months ago
wot a load of rubbish... Bring back the 70's movie, hasnt been beaten yet, carl anderson as judas n Ted Neeley as Jesus, this is so tame a version, an attempt to shock us with bdsm costumes, poor interpretation of a great story n musical.
cass3765 11 months ago 2
One of the best versions are existing........!!!!
mirandolinochka 1 year ago
This is kind of written to be seriousy messed up. I really like the interpretation, Judas acting like some kind of TV show host as Jesus struggles to lift the cross. It's quite moving at 3:40 , when the act drops.
witness124 1 year ago 2
I do like this version, actually. It's not something that can be understood on it's own. In this version, Judas is darker and still angry and despairing. I mean, he only completed suicide from those thoughts and they won't disappear instantly. But there are moments when the "cameras" are not on him he shows to be less mocking. And then in the final scene of the song and in the final song, he appears again...past anger and altogether more introspective.
doctortehe 1 year ago
what says Judas to Jesus, then he only move his lips?
BloodyFullmoon 1 year ago
@BloodyFullmoon i think he sad `why`
TheMaddin666 1 year ago
Watched the 2000 version of Jesus Christ Superstar several times. I think they did an amazing job lifting it out of the Hippie vibe of the 70's. I liked most scenes except "Superstar." I think the director missed the boat here. Dead Judas knows the impact of Christianity on history. Judas comes back to reflect on this as well as make a statement Jesus continues to be a mystery. In this version, Judas has no perspective. He just mocks Jesus, I guess because he is still angry that Jesus used him.
karenlouisa62 1 year ago
...this has NOTHING on the 1973 version...
rosyyaoi2 1 year ago 2
It's harder to sympathize with the characters in this version. The beauty of the original is that is was a tragedy of Judas. Who are we supposed to sympathize with in this version?
thequietkid10 1 year ago 3
1:04 Judas seems a bit too cheerful
FreidrichIII 1 year ago
ok im not trying to be a purist but almost every part of this movie comes up short compared to the 1973 one, except herod, this version's herod is a badass.
greendayfan234 1 year ago
Actually, I'm french (like Pradon, you noticed). Still, my judgement is not biaised.I agree this Judas-character is harder to sympathize with. He's nowhere near a martyr.But his feelings appear to be a mix of selfishness, guilt, shame, fear for himself and his companions. He hates Jesus whose delusions of grandeur could have 'em all killed. And he hates Jesus even more for forcing him into taking such measures.But you can't deny those love glances either. This duality makes'em more human.
TheLucbrown 1 year ago
B-U-tiful!
Juda's ability to sing is in no question, it's just a matter of taste.
I didn't know the ancient version, that I watched one minute ago. Can't you see how this one is muh more vivid, dramatic, moving?
And I'm a black saying this.
TheLucbrown 1 year ago
@TheLucbrown Congrats, my African-American friend. I'm no fan of Hitler, and I'm a white saying this.
Anyways, this Judas is COMPLETELY different from the 'ancient' version. This Judas is a snarky bastard that just came back from Hell. The 1973 Judas is a martyr who was recognized by God for allowing the plan to take place.
MeltedDeath 1 year ago
I think the main problem people have with the 2000 version is how the characters were characterized. It's execution was beautiful and matches indeed the typical crazy anachronisms the play should offer, but here we have a Judas that is harder to sympathize with (plus a questionable singing ability), and a Christ a little too arrogant.
GranitePlox 1 year ago
I'm a 50 something year old woman who has loved the movie JCS for 35 years and I say I love the 2000 film just as much. Although they tell the same story, with almost the exact same words and basic scenes, they're two totally different movies. The new one is basically a filmed stage play, with different actors, different voices, a different feel in a different time. They're both great films, just in different ways.
LadyNightthorn 1 year ago
Personally this version had more impact on me. Just seems to have more emotion/drama, I think partly because they are actually looking at eachother and responding to eachother... I know that the 70's version has a huge crazy fanbase that would probably murder me for actually liking the 2000 version but *shrug*
1009961 1 year ago
This is... ... garbage. Why is there so very few redeeming qualities about the 2000 version??
MusicAddict5 1 year ago
2:15 lol
havregryn96 1 year ago
THIS MUST BE JOKE!
Fjoln 1 year ago
Judas rocks
ilussionordream 1 year ago
this is bull shit, 1973 rulles
ciayraux 1 year ago 20
@ciayraux u re kid or idiot :) both are good :)
rederlt 7 months ago
@ciayrauxhey hey hey,dont say that plz
martailarts1997 6 months ago
@martailarts1997 i mean the 2000 version, sucks, the original of 1973 its the best
ciayraux 6 months ago
i think they sing it with another meaning.. the 1973 version judas was nicer to jesus in this song..
lakasana 1 year ago
Hes an alright singer tbh but i dont like his outfit here, Whilst carl anderson when he came down with that sick outfit :D Priceless, but yeah he should have looked more heavenly
hrvggz 1 year ago
I really want a red jacket like that 0.0
17sundays 1 year ago 3
Is that blade?
xXxItaChanxXx 1 year ago
makes you feel as if the humiliation is on to you
SIAFSX 1 year ago
0:18 blahaerkjaer;lkewjr;ekrat
no joke though, i love this movie.
chiaroscurolove 1 year ago
This could have been done so much better...there are so many more live performances which are so much more perfect...
jules25111994 1 year ago
This is like Freddie Mercury in the 80s lol. Don't get me wrong I don't mind Queen, but something is just wrong with Judas being portrayed as an 80s gay rocker.
trrrewr 1 year ago
Crucificaram o Jesus, e degolaram Andrew lloyd webber...
Vou te contar heim... Tô Louco então, joga fora essa versão e vão pra PQP
igormariante 1 year ago
I'm sorry, but what's wrong with you people. His voice is stupid. It doesnt suit this at all. Yes hes dramatic and an alright actor but voice-wise. I think not.
Bloodprow6 1 year ago
Jerome plays the mania and complexity of Judas so well. His voice suits the hysteria of it all.
jennarp1 1 year ago
where can we see the entire film!
ration10 1 year ago
@ration10 you can buy it from Amazon
karenf1001 1 year ago
All you people can say things like this isnt how its so posed to be, and its better the other way, but Andrew Lloyd Webber himself, he liked the direction (not necessarily the preformance) better in this one. He went on record as saying that as a whole, he found the original to be overall fake and cheesy.
before you criticize this version, take that into thought.
snakefoote 1 year ago
Its called artistic interpretation... Yes the original was good but this is what happens with Broadway shows they get revived with different points of view created by different people. Thats the fun part I have seen original shows and then their revival and I still love watching them. Attacking them, their creators, or their actors is just bad taste. Keep your horrid comments to yourself!
toolfann11 1 year ago
I think i like it more than the original. In my point of view the director shows how twisted is our world today and how easily if Jesus was now on earth the story would have turn into a reality for the mass media and we would loose the meaning of his words. Excellent work i really loved it.
pggcreations 1 year ago
brilliant
z191 1 year ago
This is such shit. I understand that interpretation is a big part of theatre, but this number is not supposed to be Judas teasing Jesus, as portrayed here. And by the way, the Judas part is just better when someone with soul can sing it, and I'm white saying that.
shootstathrill 1 year ago
the version from 73 was sooo much better nobody can beat ted neeley...
katchia666 1 year ago
how come this seen seems like gay BSDM?
BigFatTubOfLardCo 1 year ago 30
@BigFatTubOfLardCo With all the showgirls, this may be the single least gay number of the film. Have you seen the rest?
IoEstasCedonta 1 year ago
@BigFatTubOfLardCo maybe because you are projection your own deeply seeded sexual agenda? what indicates gay? as in homosexual? sort of a Rorschach test for you?
Pisces31660 1 year ago
@BigFatTubOfLardCo Because BDSM is not "gay". Lots of straight people participate in BDSM, fella.
rodeojim1 1 year ago
@rodeojim1 lol XD
hrvggz 11 months ago
@BigFatTubOfLardCo there does seem to be quite a bit of Judas and Jesus man handling in these doesn't there haha.
Antichrist2000 10 months ago
@BigFatTubOfLardCo I think why this seems so "gay" between Jesus and Judas is that they made them in this version close and Judas was Jesus rigth hand and Jesus hoped that Judas could be safed and be better man if he just let Jesus help him and now when Judas sang, Jesus tried to reach him again
MorfandTwige 8 months ago
the original movie ownz this shit, carl anderson ftw
VargVikingoPagano 1 year ago
yeeeeeeah.... the great thing about Youtube is that we can compare the 2000 revival to the 1973 film... what's sad is that the original film is so freaking great, that any other production is gonna suck rocks in comparison. I just watched this back to back with "superstar" 1973... I think they missed the point in this production... the director especially.
garboil 1 year ago
@garboil yes, I agree, but I think at one of the last pieces Judas acts wonderfully with his eyes, but I think Judas asked Jesus some real questions in the movie, and here it's just to fool with him...
But I love this version of Gethsemane, so much emotion!
Embricana 1 year ago
this movie sucks, and judas sucks dcks, the classical hippie black judas had a beautifull voice and put so much passion in the acting and singing, i really believed that he was doing the right thing and doing it for his people.
this judas sucks singing, and fking jesus is just criying all the time, he makes want to vomit all over my fking screen, hes just lame.
1973 jc super start rocks :)
simpleman6942 1 year ago
i actually love this so much. i thinks its so clever and brilliant!
XiluvmelX 1 year ago
dude ... this is so funny ... i luv it ...
TopBanana360 1 year ago
is this suppossed to be funny? ecause...it's kind..of funny
EatColorBlue 1 year ago
@EatColorBlue Not funny, but ironic. :D
szekelymihai 1 year ago
@szekelymihai 0:20 ..hhahaahha
EatColorBlue 1 year ago
What are you talking about?? This Judas is awesome!!! :3
IHMJ5307 1 year ago 2
I Love the scene where they ,take jesus away, to put him on the cross, How Jesus Cries out to judas, And judas stares at him, Such pain,Hate and worry is in his eyes.
SO DRAMATIC!
Gahoyify 1 year ago 27
@Gahoyify yes beautiful how a man can act with his eyes!
Embricana 1 year ago
And also. The original movie and the actual play portray Judas as being sorry and he really believed what he was doing was right and what he was told to do. I'm not religious, I only enjoy this musical because of Sir Webber, but this is a disgrace to the franchise really.
PotO2004Phantom 1 year ago
@PotO2004Phantom heck yeah everytime i hear judas sing in this version it sounds like he's swallowing a jar of nails
the original is better
hairmetal4ever95 1 year ago
Such a terrible Judas.. Drew Sarich and Carl Anderson are the greatest.
PotO2004Phantom 1 year ago
@PotO2004Phantom Never heard Murray Head I take it.
TripeHoundRedux 1 year ago
Comment removed
PotO2004Phantom 1 year ago
@TripeHoundRedux I don't think he's really that great at all. IMO atleast. Sorry. Drew Sarich, he's the best singer in any play/musical/opera/w.e you'll see.
PotO2004Phantom 1 year ago
@PotO2004Phantom Drew played Armand in Lestat didn't he? if he did he was brilliant :D
Medusa0999 1 year ago
Comment removed
PotO2004Phantom 1 year ago
Yes he did. I didn't see that sadly :( I am a huge Vampire Chronicles fan too. Just never got around to seeing it. I may just look up some of the stuff on here =P
PotO2004Phantom 1 year ago
2 comments! yay!
8guesswhat8 1 year ago
1 comment! yay!
MasterDJ291 2 years ago