BARABBAS (1961)

THE FILM

FILM DIRECTOR: Richard Fleischer

SCREENWRITER: Christopher Fry, Nigel Balchin (uncredited), Diego Fabbri (uncredited), Ivo Perilli (uncredited), Salvatore Quasimodo (Italian dialogue) (uncredited)

FILM STARS: Anthony Quinn, Silvana Mangano, Jack Palance, Ernest Borgnine, Arthur Kennedy, Katy Jurado, Harry Andrews, Vittorio Gassman, Norman Wooland, Valentina Cortese, Arnoldo Foà, Michael Gwynn, Laurence Payne, Douglas Fowley, Guido Celano, Enrico Glori, Sharon Tate.

COUNTRY: Italy – USA

THIS BOOK

AUTHOR: Par Lagerkvist

TYPE: Novel

PUBLISHER: Four Square

THIS EDITION PUBLISHED: 1962

COUNTRY: Great Britain

COVER: Paperback

THE ORIGINAL BOOK

ORIGINAL AUTHOR: As Above

YEAR FIRST PUBLISHED: 1950

ORIGINAL BOOK TITLE: The film title

NOTES

GENRE: Historical

WORDS: I saw the film so long ago I have little recollection of it. But given it stars (favourites) Anthony Quinn and Ernest Borgnine and is directed by (favourite) Richard Fleischer it deserves to be revisited.

The story (of Barabbas) is familiar enough to anyone of the Christian west, though only in part. The novel (and film) follow Barabbas after Christ’s crucifixion as he struggles with answering “why me?”

The premise of the movie (and novel) is that Barabbas has to go around in life with the weight of the fact that the Son of God died in his place. The film, then, is a long movie about survivor’s guilt. The book is an existentialist, philosophical look at faith and belief by a Swede who had rejected Christianity (but never became bitter to it). In 1951 Pär Lagerkvist was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature largely on the back of this book’s popularity (critical and public).

The novel (which is quite short) and the film (which is quite long) both set out to ask what became of the man who was freed instead of Christ. The novel is a pure work of fiction which expands the story of Barabbas in the Bible. The film expands the novel even further … and adds all sorts of action scenes as required in a Biblical epic.  The novel’s Barabbas wants to believe in Christ but his nature prevents him from accepting a God who preaches love and forgiveness. He wants rough justice. He cannot affirm his faith. He cannot pray. He can only say, “I want to believe.” The film is more ambivalent and can be read (at the end) as a person who has placed his faith in Christ.

Postscript (12.05.2026).

I watched the film recently, at Easter, with the kids, and I’m glad I revisited it. I read the novel and am glad I did. Everything I had said above is correct but revisiting the film and the book has put more meat on the bones. The film is a Hollywood (via Italy) thoughtful Biblical epic whist the books is a man struggling with who he is. The Barabbas of the book understands his good fortune when Jesus Christ takes his position on the cross but understands little else. His life s a series of events where God is present through others and it seems as he has understood the message only to fail. Only at the end, totally alone, on his crucifixion does it come to him. Does he see God or is it the fear of, as a friend said to me once about atheists, “they all die roaring for God”, or a bit of both. The Bible has next to no detail on Barabbas’ background so Lagerkvist fills in the detail – the carouser, the hedonist, the thug who apart from escaping the crucifixion always seems to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, or perhaps the right place at the right time but misinterpreting the events. He is unable to understand spiritual love and, accordingly unable to understand the Christian faith. Various characters in the book extend the faith to him, and just when it seems he gets it, he fails. He can only say, “I want to believe.” On my reading, though, he (speed bumps aside) is moving to faith which finally dawns on him. The book is short and not dull but I found it a slow read perhaps because of its mix of Swedish existentialism and Protestant despair.

Lagerkvist won the Nobel prize (which usually honours a complete body of work rather than single titles) in 1951 after having been nominated three times earlier (1947, 1949, 1950) “for the artistic vigour and true independence of mind with which he endeavours in his poetry to find answers to the eternal questions confronting mankind”. I suppose the book does do that. And it was a best seller.

The Barabbas of the film is as conflicted as the Barabbas of the book and Anthony Quinn is perfect in the role. But this is meant to be an epic produced by Dino De Laurentiis , not a internal monologue (the film would be vastly different if directed by Robert Bresson) so action is needed. the book has all that but the crucifixion, the life of a slave, the working in the mines are only backdrops (and tests) for Barabbas. In the film they become big action or dramatic set pieces. And to cap it off the final third of the film has Barabbas becoming a gladiator (and vanquishing (sort of) the evil Jack Palance) before finding his faith and dying on the cross. None of this is in the book. Barabbas has doubt, and is tested but he is never quite alone, and he is always moving towards faith. The film with its (relative) optimism and big action set pieces becomes rousing Catholicism.

The film is still a handsome film and it has the look (perhaps because it was filmed in Italy with an Italian crew – Italian, Aldo Tonti, was the cinematographer) the look of a big budget art film with dollops or realism. Some of the shots are lit and framed with a intention to mood not to narrative (the film is famous for shooting its genuinely ethereal crucifixion scene during a real solar eclipse on February 15, 1961, which occurred over southern Europe), the script by poet and playwright Christopher Fry is sufficiently cerebral and the score by Mario Nascimbene is unconventional (though still epic). The performances are great and though the glorified cameos by Borgnine, Palance, and Arthur Kennedy may be intrusive, I like Borgnine (love Borgnine), Palance, and Arthur Kennedy. The rest of the cast, especially Gassman, is solid but Quinn is the whole show and he carries the film. Quinn played good guys, bad guys, and a lot of loud guys but he also played a lot of introspective characters. Here he is both loud and introspective which is probably where Quin himself was at (his autobiography from 1972 “The Original Sin” is perhaps the best Hollywood autobiography I have read). Fleischer proves yet again he is underrated as a director (best at small action films and drams he also did big budget epic type films  – 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea (1954), The Vikings (1958), Tora! Tora! Tora! (1970)), and De Laurentiis shows he can throw money around and make it look good (he was never a stranger to producing epics – Attila (1954), Ulysses (1954), War and Peace (1956), and later The Bible: In the Beginning… (1966), Anzio (1968), Waterloo (1970)) and make convincing dramas (La Strada (1954), Woman of Rome (1954), Nights of Cabiria (1957), Five Branded Women (1960)) … Barabbas was the fourth of four films he made with Anthony Quinn (the other three – La Strada, Attila, Ulysses).

The film did well at the the Italian and International box office and did fair trade in the US.

See the film, read the book.

LINKS

TRAILER

The Italian trailer which is the same though sharper in picture