The Passion of the Christ


Movie Review for The Passion of the Christ

A week ago Saturday, we went to the new Cinema Deluxe 16 on Preston Highway and decided to catch Mel Gibson's new movie, The Passion in one of the fancy Directors Halls.

Normally, I try to write my reviews the same weekend I see the film, just to make sure that what I write is fresh in my mind, and that what I write is out here on the blog in a timely manner, for films are only in theatres for a limited time nowadays. For this film, however, I waited a week to further contemplate what I had seen, and to reflect upon what the film may ultimately come to mean. When you come to the end of this piece, you my gentle readers, may regard it a wasted week in light of my final opinion of the film, but there are some serious questions raised by the film and the reaction to it, and I am afraid this, more than most films of late, will have more import as a social flashpoint, than it will as the poor film my review will proport it to be.

Before we begin, I must state (though most of you already know this) that I am not, nor have I ever been a Christian. That said, I am familiar with most of the teachings of the faith and I am always respectful of the religion and its followers. Keep in mind, that negative comments in this review are over the Gospel according to St. Mel and should not by extension, be construed as a denigration of the Gospels found in the New Testament.

In opening my review of The Passion of the Christ, I am afraid I must address the controversy that has surrounded this film since last fall: its percieved anti-Semitism. Is the film anti-Semitic? In and of itself, no. Some of the criticism of the film on this score is unjustified; one point of contention would be that Caiaphas (Mattia Sbragia) and the priests of the Temple are portrayed in a negative, almost sinister stereotypical light, and it is here that Mr. Gibson dances upon the razor's edge between artistic license and an anti-Semitic portrayal that he has gone out of his way to deny in the weeks leading up to the release, but even here one must keep in mind the motivations of the religious hierarchy which I will address later in this review. Any intelligent interpretation of the film within the historical context of the times will show this film to not be anti-Semitic. That being said, there will always be those whose beliefs and/or upbringing will lead to different interpretations beyond the control of Mr. Gibson, or any other director who might have chosen to film this story from the perspective taken in this film. The seeds of hate will always find their roots in the fertile soil of the weak-minded.

I went into this film trying to maintain an open mind, and put all the stories of controversy over its anti-Semitism, its graphic violence and other issues out of my head and just judge the film on its merits as a medium of story-telling. However, one of the criticism could not be overlooked once we started watching the film; in over 40 years of watching films, this has to be the most graphically violent film I have ever seen. The unflinching eye of the camera did not keep this member of the audience from flinching repeatedly. The 15 minute ordeal of the scourging left me nearly incapable of watching the screen, nauseated, and at times it felt as if the sharpened flails were biting into my own flesh. The 45 minute procession to Golgotha was nothing but a brutal anticlimax after watching the Romans in their bloodlust. If there was ever an example of a film being more deserving of an NC-17 rating, rather than the R that the MPAA gave it, it would be this film.

Most of the time, I go to the movies for escapism, to be transported to another place or another time. Sometimes, I go to get lost in the images on the screen. Other times, for "Important" films, I go to be enlightened, or to receive a message. The Passion succeeds in transporting me to another place and time, but its message was lost in its barbaric brutality. The cinematography was in places quite beautiful, but then the camera spent far too much time lingering over images of torn flesh, to the point where it approached bestial pornography. Enlightenment and/or transcendence is nearly impossible attainments under such a heavy hand.

The film opens without titles or credits with a downward panning shot into the moonlit mist shrouding the Garden of Gethsemene. Jesus (James Caviezel) is waiting for Caiaphas' troops while battling his fears and self-doubts with a sly taunting by Satan (Rosalinda Celentano) from the shadows. The clichéd use of light and shadow to add weight to this conflict, to say nothing of the more-than-a-little obvious dash of sinister music would be forgivable were it not for the androgynous Satan, who in her robes looked like a casting reject from a Lucas film. From this point, the story is the familiar one and I will not retell it here.

The decision to film the story in Latin (though a street version of Latin and not the classic form I learned in school) and Aramaic with English subtitles is an inspired one; adding to the sense of distancing oneself into 1st century Jerusalem. It is simply too bad that more attention could not have been given to present a more historically accurate story. I have always had a problem believing that Pilate (Hristo Shopov) would have dithered so long over of a question of whether to crucify or not. This was a man noted for his ruthlessness, having more than once lined the roads with crosses to keep order in the Roman way. It would be more believable had he sent Jesus on his way to Golgotha and washed his hands of a nuisance rather than over a moral conflict. By modern standards, there was no nobility in the Roman rulers of the provinces any more than there was in Rome itself, but it was the way Pax Romanus was maintained. The Judaic establishment probably had a more political reason to see the execution carried out; Jesus and his followers represented a possible threat to their power, but of more immediate concern was their worry that He might be considered a potential instigator of rebellion by the Romans, and rather than let the wrath of Rome be brought down upon their heads and upon their people, Jesus must be eliminated.

I will not waste any more space here to describe the tortures and the Crucifixion, but before one defends the depiction of violence in this film as a acceptable representation of the acts visited upon Jesus, and that what he endured was for all our sins, I must remind those who would listen, that He was not singled out for cruelty; scourging was a common form of punishment and even execution at that time, as was crucifixion. The scenes could have carried as much weight if shown not so graphically. Perhaps the message that I thought Christianity was meant to convey, that of love and kindness toward one's fellow man, even toward one's enemies could have been told, instead of the glaring showcasing of the cruelty that we are capable of even today, writ large on the screen. There were moments of flashback in the story, from the Sermon on the Mount to the Last Supper and even touching moments of Him as a child with Mary (Maia Morgenstern) that were told so lovingly that it is a shame that they had to be juxtaposed with so many images of horrific inhumanity. The film may be a true depiction of scourging and crucifixion, but is that cruelty really the message?

A final point to consider, one that I admit is a minor quibble: what was with the choice of music at the Resurrection? The music was more martial than uplifting or spiritual, something that would have sounded less out of place in a film like Gladiator. What did it signify, that it is time to go out and kick non-believer butt?

After my week of reflection, my summation is that the film is a Gospel that has the wrong message. I am still stunned by the experience, but what troubles me most is the fact that I saw children (pre-teens) in the theatre, which makes me wonder what possible message they will carry from the film. Even though, as I stated earlier that I am not a Christian, I do believe that a message such as Jesus brought with its theme of Love and Hope is what the world should be striving for, it has been a sad fact that too often, the message has been twisted and distorted to suit the wishes of the one bearing the message at the expense of the truth. Is this the message those children will carry into our future? Will a glorification of hatred be our legacy? Was this only a bad movie?

Time will tell...

Final Rating: 1 out of 10 stars.

Rated R
2 hours 7 minutes

Internet Movie Database Link
Official Website

Posted: Sun - March 14, 2004 at 03:21 PM      

©