The Book of Clarence Parent Guide

Desperate to get a woman’s attention, Clarence (LaKeith Stanfield) made a bad decision. He borrowed a horse and a racing chariot from Jedediah the Terrible (Eric Kofi-Abrefa), only to be ambushed and robbed. Now he has thirty days to repay Jedediah or be killed.

Clarence’s first priority is self-protection and his thoughts turn to his estranged brother, Thomas (also played by Stanfield). Thomas is one of Jesus of Nazareth’s (Nicholas Pinnock) twelve apostles, and Clarence figures a group with that kind of power and public profile would keep him safe. There’s a hitch, though: Clarence doesn’t believe in God.

When his bid to become the thirteenth apostle fails, Clarence gets another brain wave. He’s going to become another Messiah, using religiosity as a cloak while collecting donations to settle his debt. Full of excitement, Clarence starts his “ministry”. He speaks to small crowds, which rapidly grow larger, performing fake miracles and preaching his core message, “Knowing is better than believing.” People are impressed and money starts rolling in.

Then the problems pile up. First, Clarence doesn’t like the person he’s become – and he’s inconveniently concerned about the welfare of others. Second, Rome has decided to crack down on Jewish Messiahs and their radical ideas. And, third, what if Jesus is exactly who he says he is and God turns out to be real?

Before I wade into the religious dimensions of this story, let me cut to the chase: from a critical perspective, this is a dreadful film. It’s massively bloated, clocking at two-and-a-quarter hours of long-drawn-out boredom. The comedy feels clumsy; when it tries to be arch it’s simply pretentious. And when the plot labors to deliver significant existential messages, it stumbles over its own silliness. Not even the director’s intriguing decision to add a layer of racial politics by casting all Jews as Black actors and all Romans as white is enough to center the story. It simply increases its incoherence.

The real division of opinion regarding this movie will be among Christian viewers. Some will see this as a redemptive tale; a journey from doubter to believer; a manifestation of unearned grace. Other Christians will find the movie blasphemous and deeply offensive. Personally, I have no issues with a good tale of spiritual transformation, but I am always opposed to extra-canonical stories about Jesus. (I’m equal opportunity here: I dislike syrupy non-Biblical Christian material too.) I personally feel that using details of Christ’s life as material for a dark comedy is inappropriate and deeply disrespectful to those who view the Bible as a sacred text. I will also point out that I would feel the same about any film that was equally insensitive to other religions.

Other problems with the movie come in its constant substance use and bloody violence. Clarence is a “seller of herbs” who is constantly smoking and sometimes high, a state which is emphasized by having drug users literally float off the ground. The violence is more problematic, with frequent, bloody scenes of physical combat, many of which involve weapons. There’s also a public stoning, and an agonizingly detailed crucifixion. The negative content only magnifies the film’s tonal confusion, as it tries to jump between comedy, social commentary, and religious drama. It would take a miracle to make this movie work and there are none to be found.