[possum]

I doubt it will. It probably won't get into his scatalogical obsessions either. And from the review, it sounds like the filmmakers take Luther's denial of responsibility for the consequences of his beliefs (peasant riots, immediately, and modern, more horrible consequences) at face value.

On the other hand, the relationship between Luther and the Ustinov character could be interesting -- a tyrant using Luther's beliefs as justification to seize total control over his subjects, who are left without recourse to a Church disposed against tyranny. And Luther, cheering him along, saying he didn't mean that everyone could interpret the Bible for themselves, only that the Church can't interpose itself between individuals and the all-powerful state (as long as it's Lutheran, that is).

I looked at the movie's website, and it seems to be yet more protestant revisionist history. Luther the hero, standing up against the evil Church. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be an interesting movie to watch. It could just be marketing, after all. I'll probably rent it, so if I yell at the screen I won't bother anyone I don't know or can't easily apologize to.

Someone ought to make a movie about the real Luther.

[redgolum]

I have read quite a bit about Luther, and I agree a movie about the real man and the times would be wonderful. Remember, there was two sides to the story. Luther was a self admitted hot head and tended to spout off. He was not pleased with the peasent revolt, nor with the princes response.

There were problems in the church at the time. The sale of indulgunces was getting way out of hand, and Leo X was not a good or Godly leader by any streach of the imagination. If Luther and Leo had been more even tempered, the Reformation probably wouldn't have happened.