I'm very skeptical of watching a "biblical" movie, because, until now, I have not seen one that I considered almost 100% accurate both biblically and historically (with allowance for necessary fictional dialog). Most screenwriters turn most of a movie into their own interpretation of the Bible. Besides that, most have a decidedly Catholic perspective to them. I would take issue with one or two points of "doctrine," but not enough to matter.I would recommend this motion picture to anyone interested in the life and times of the Apostle Paul. A few short scenes of violence might make some uneasy, but that's the way the Roman Empire was.

I stretched my generosity and gave this two stars for getting some of the names right. I know Caviezel thought this would be the biggest Bible movie ever, but I don't consider embellishment to qualify such hope. Did Paul's ministry need such frippery?Luke, mentioned maybe four times in Scripture, was without the details invented for this movie. Did no one bother reading the Bible prior to this production? Did anyone protest taking such liberties, yet have the audacity to call this a Bible movie? It's a fanciful tale of a few heroic names from Scripture, but we know little of Luke, Priscilla, Aquila, other than they were staunch supporters of Paul's Christ-centered ministry, and traveling companions. I've watched about 25 biblically based movies, and while none have earned my revulsion quite like Jeremy Sisto's portrayal of Jesus, few are excellent. This one falls far short of what was probably the expectation of Gibson. I can even take some adornments of Bible records, but to base an entire movie on them isn't acceptable. We have no greater record of an Apostle than Paul's. Gibson's movie proves that adornments can't enhance our historical records from the Bible.

The story covers Paul going from the most infamous persecutor of Christians to Jesus Christ's most influential apostle. Paul, Apostle of Christ seemed like an interesting film to be released on 2018 plus it marks the return of Jim Caviezel (a very talented actor) back in faith based films since the 2004 'Passion of the Christ' the Mel Gibson film that divided audiences and critics alike. Unfortunate tho this new faith based film is missing a few important elements like an interesting story to be told and a good script in general and despite the solid perfomances which were good for the most part? It didn't showcase anything more to it except to waste the time of it's viewers and it's actors. (5.0/10)

How do I write a review about a flick that is beneath gutter garbage? Answer is I cannot.To be quite honest I could not even finish this attempt at movie making. The investors should sue the producers, director, actors, etc. for the complete waste of money. I feel somebody lined their pockets by making a fool of everybody else.Flush this crap!