Netflix’s New Biblical ‘Mary’ Biopic A Reverent Disappointment
(REVIEW) We’re in what seems like a second faith-based movie renaissance (with the success, for example, of shows like “The Chosen”). This Christmas, Netflix is giving us “Mary,” a supernatural coming-of-age story interpretation of her life and Jesus’ birth. Next year, Angel Studios is giving us “Bethlehem,” a thriller version of Mary, Joseph and Jesus’ escape from King Herod.
And why not? Mary and the Christmas story are among the most famous and beloved around the world. Now that Christian filmmakers like the Erwin Brothers (“I Can Only Imagine” and “The Jesus Revolution”) and Dallas Jenkins (“The Chosen” and “The Best Christmas Pageant Ever”) have shown they are more than competent enough filmmakers to make quality work that draws in faith-based audiences, Hollywood is eager to invest in such films.
Of course, like all beloved stories that have been around for a few thousand years, this one creates passionate responses. In reality, “Mary” has only been promoted by Netflix in earnest since November, when it released the film’s first trailer. Nonetheless, it has managed to generate plenty of concerns and controversy in a short amount of time.
Running now through Dec. 31, NewsMatch will match your donations up to $1,000. Your generosity will help keep Religion Unplugged going in 2025 and beyond. You can donate here.
Among Christians, it generated the typical concern that a company like Netflix — known for some unorthodox past representations of Jesus — would be unfaithful to the story as Christians understand it. Christian YouTuber Mike Winger reacted to the trailer by saying, “Anytime Hollywood tries to make content based on the Bible, based on Christianity, I cringe. I die a little inside. … I’m not saying this was made to undermine Christianity, but will this represent things properly or not?”
In a more political vein, the casting of Mary by an Israeli actress has sparked outrage from the anti-Israel crowd. They claim the move is “diabolical” because the real Mary and Joseph were “Palestinian.”
For their part, “Mary” director D.J. Caruso (famous for such works as “Disturbia,” “Eagle Eye” and “Shut In”), a practicing Catholic, and actress Noa Cohen, who plays Mary, have both expressed reverence for the film’s protagonist as well as the source material. As Caruso told the National Catholic Register: “I am devoted to Mary. I’m Catholic. I was raised Catholic in Norwalk, Conn., stayed Catholic my whole life and stayed with the church. We’re a family of five. We are a very strong Catholic family. Everyone’s gone to Catholic schools. We love it. And obviously, particularly being Catholic and praying to Mary, and understanding her as an intercessor, it’s vital to who we are as a family and to our faith. So, for me, [I wanted] to make a movie to celebrate her.”
Caruso’s inspiration came from another classic Catholic filmmaker: Mel Gibson and his film “The Passion of the Christ.”
He added: ”Well, the real origin of this story starts with Mary, doesn’t it? So how can I tell a story that’s compelling and makes her human and accessible?”
Caruso also defended casting an Israeli actress, stressing the importance of doing so to ensure “authenticity” since Mary was Jewish.
Photo courtesy of Netflix
Cohen, for her part, also spoke of the deep respect she had for Mary that led her to want to take on the role. In a message to Religion Unplugged, she said, “I decided to take on the role of Mary because it offered a unique opportunity to explore a side of her that hadn’t been fully portrayed before.
“This is a film that allows audiences to see Mary not just as a vessel for something greater but as a young woman navigating the complexities of life, balancing her divine role with her humanity. Playing her was an incredible experience that felt both humbling and a tremendous responsibility. Embodying her vulnerability and resilience as she faced both divine and very human challenges was deeply fulfilling. It was a special opportunity to bring her story to life in a way that will hopefully allow the audience to connect with her on a deeply human level.”
Is the movie ultimately worthy of its subject? For starters, it is very faithful to the core of what most Christians care about when they think about Mary. She is portrayed as both grounded and saintly. Both Protestants and Catholics will find her to be admirable and very human. The movie hits or affirms all the main beats of the Nativity story. The things it does add — whether made up or taken from places like the “Protoevangelium of James” (such as Mary’s miraculous birth to aged parents or extended stay growing up at the temple in Jerusalem) — may seem odd to some, but they don’t add up to anything uncomfortable doctrinally.
While the “Journey to Bethlehem” movie’s focus is on telling the story with a funny, kids-movie vibe that makes the story feel a tad trivial, “Mary” is hyper-sincere, almost like a CW show. Like in a CW show, regardless of whether the dialogue or events are convincing or corny, actors play it absolutely straight. When this works, it has the weight and gravitas that one would want or expect from a story about one of the most important events in history. When it doesn’t, it comes off as unintentionally funny.
Most of the actors do a fine job. Noa believably balances her need to play the resident “relatable female protagonist of a coming-of-age story” and a religious icon. While the script never gives her much of a chance to develop beyond surface-level archetypes, she still manages to be an authentic presence within those constraints. People like Mary’s parents check their boxes well enough. Gabriel and Satan are played up with a kind of weird and surreal vibe that makes them feel sometimes uncomfortably — and sometimes hilariously — out of place. Joseph feels the most lightweight as a pretty boy without much else going on.
Anthony Hopkins, meanwhile, is perfect as Herod, and his scenes are easily the film’s best. The film portrays Herod as a charismatic and accomplished leader whose obsession with hanging on to power slowly drives him to bloodthirsty madness (pretty faithful to what we know of Herod in real life). Hopkins deftly balances Herod’s messianic complex and charm with his slowly self-destructive insanity.
Herod is often the one in any scene who seems the most self-aware, mocking the other characters for straight-faced earnestness — including their faith in the coming Messiah — and making him one of the most compelling and entertaining characters onscreen. And yet, this mockery is not triumphant. As Herod keeps being thwarted by those he demeans, it's the mocker who slowly seems pathetic. Hopkins seamlessly moves from the powerful Herod to the pitiful and crazy version such that by the end he feels like he has easily the best arc in the film.
Unfortunately, despite the film’s reverence and its strong elements, most of the movie is simultaneously overstuffed and underdeveloped. Every other scene seems to introduce a new idea, thread or genre that is then abandoned in the next one to switch gears once again. This means few of the ideas get a chance to breathe or truly grow into anything significant.
First, the story is about Mary’s parents praying for a child. Then, it’s about Mary growing up in the temple and trying to figure out her place. That’s followed by her relationship with Joseph. Then the proxy war between Gabriel and Satan over Mary emerges. Then, she’s pregnant with Jesus, and her parents and Joseph don’t believe her. And so on. In each of these story lines, Mary starts an emotional arc and then has to abruptly wrap it up and start another when the next plot starts.
The presence of Gabriel constantly intervening in the story also weakens the characters, who end up having no significant agency. The archangel tells Mary’s parents they have to send her to the temple. Gabriel guides Joseph to Mary. Gabriel then tells her parents to marry Joseph and Mary.
There almost feels like a fear that audiences will get bored if they aren’t force-fed drama every five minutes. On top of that, the drama appears to be cranked up in every instance. Mary can’t just be dealing with doubts. Instead, she has to be attacked by Satan. Joseph can’t just confront Mary about her pregnancy. Instead, they have to be dragged in front of a mob screaming at Joseph to stone her. Mary and Joseph can’t just attempt to escape. They have to have fight with robbers and Roman soldiers.
Some of the elements brought in to create drama can also get hokey. Mary staring at Herod and giving him a seizure made me laugh out loud. Joseph fighting Roman soldiers like Liam Neeson in “Taken” made me roll my eyes. One can easily get worked up about the movie’s flaws.
“Mary” is, after all, a Netflix movie meant to be streamed. It didn’t have a theatrical release. It’s meant to be enjoyed over the holidays the way viewers would watch a Hallmark movie. It’s also a movie that is not in any significant way (although I’m sure someone will disagree with me) blasphemous or heretical. In that vein, it’s nice that a depiction of Jesus’s birth is going to have a place at that table during the Christmas season.
For those who want a modern retelling of Mary and the Christmas story that lives up to its potential, “Mary” is sure to disappoint. For those who simply want to enjoy a reverent take on the Christmas story that has a place at the table in a world of endless secular content, this might be just what the angels ordered.
“Mary” is available on Netflix starting Dec. 6.
Joseph Holmes is an award-nominated filmmaker and culture critic living in New York City. He is co-host of the podcast “The Overthinkers” and its companion website theoverthinkersjournal.world, where he discusses art, culture and faith with his fellow overthinkers. His other work and contact info can be found at his website josephholmesstudios.com.