Dislike biblical portrayals to begin with so watched only one recent episode of "The Bible." I prefer to form my own mental pictures from written accounts that have survived to this day, inaccurate as they may be. Why should film makers decide for me what Jesus looked like?
What clinched such idiocy was when some right-wing politician remarked that the eerie resemblance of the Satan character in the film to President Obama was indeed not accidental, but God guiding the hand of the casting director.
I'm not sure the film directors are familiar with the story. Jesus is a veritable hunk in the film, when in "reality" he was so ordinary looking that Judas had kiss him to point him out in the crowd - to the Romans soldiers. It's a wonder the film didn't furnish him with a halo. In other words, Jesus probably looked like any other stereotypical middle-eastern male of the day- dark skinned and short and slight of stature. Certainly not so gorgeous the constant gleaming white robe was entirely superfluous.
The part of the film, though, that caused me considerable consternation and a bit of amusement was the enactment of Acts 2:4. This is when the Christians were gathered and "all of them were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other languages, as the Spirit gave them ability"(New RSV). I almost missed this scene, it is so contrived. There are people right here in Alpena today with the genuine thing. According to St. Paul, we don't know how to pray as we "ought," anyway - but "the Spirit itself maketh the intercession for us with groaning which cannot be uttered" (Rom. 8:26 KJV.)
A scene better omitted.