The Passion of the Christ (2004)

Director: Mel Gibson
Starring: Jim Caviezel, Monica Belucci, Maia Morgenstern

Synopsis:
The last days of Jesus Christ are depicted, from His apprehension at the Garden of Gethsemane to the Crucifixion.

Impressions:
As a disclaimer, let me just say that I can't divorce my personal religious sentiment from this review. Bear that in mind as you go forward. Now, I think regardless of how you feel about the subject matter, this is a striking film, bold in its unflinching brutality and innovative in its effort to recreate the language of the setting. Now, when it comes to religious cinema, the primary motivations are either an act of devotion or a cheap effort to exploit the sentiment of believers for a quick buck (which often succeeds). This movie created a lot of controversy at the time and director Mel Gibson's subsequent breakdown doesn't help matters. However, I do believe there was a sincere devotional motivation behind that film and I believe that shows through. Unless you're just actively and virulently opposed to Christianity, I think anyone can respect this sincerity regardless of denomination or creed.

This is a lavish production with great attention to detail. Clearly no expense was spared to give about as real a sense of 1st Century Judea as you can get outside of actually being there. One of the things that first caught my interest in this film was the fact that the dialog is entirely in Aramaic and Latin and that Mel Gibson was originally not going to use subtitles. I've heard some complaints about the actual Aramaic used in the film, but not being versed in the language myself, I'll give an A for effort regardless of technical accuracy. Given that many of the cast members are Italian, I suppose it's little surprise that the Latin has a distinctly Italian accent to it.

Let's talk about performances a bit. I can't even imagine the sort of pressure that must have been on Jim Caviezel, but he does an amazing job in the role of Jesus Christ, one that took quite a physical toll on him. Maia Morgenstern has a similarly daunting role as Mary, but I believe she did well in the role. Incidental characters do a great job of establishing the atmosphere, but I want to give a special note to Rosalinda Celentano as Satan.

Now, let's talk about the violence. One of the things that stirred controversy about this film was the extremely graphic portrayal of the Passion. I credit Gibson for pulling no punches whatsoever. Do you think Roman scourging was just patting someone with dandelions, or that crucifixion is a simple matter of hanging around for a while? Anyone who's studied the history and the science of these things know how brutal they are and to show anything less soft-serves what really happened. To those who call this torture porn, the charge is abhorrent. Unlike something like Hostel or the Saw series, the violence here serves no prurient interests. In the devotional context, the violence is shown at its full brutality so that the viewer can get a true and visceral sense of Christ's sufferings.

On to the next matter of controversy. Perhaps it'd be better if I stepped away from this landmine entirely, but I'm going to step on it anyway. There were strong charges of anti-Semitism against this film. Philosemitic though I am, I can't pretend to see this film as a Jew sees it. However, it's my opinion, uninformed as you may take it to be, that hypersensitivity creates problems where there wouldn't otherwise be problems. I can't pretend to know the contents of Mel Gibson's heart and though his later drunken breakdown would appear to condemn him, I won't presume as much. I will comment, however, on the charge that the deck is stacked against the Jews in the film. Yes, most of the bad guys are Jews, but what do you think Christ Himself, His disciples, the members of the Sanhedrin opposed to the trial and all the people weeping for Him along the way were? Chinese? It seemed to me that a lot of effort was made to give a fair shake to both the good and the bad, but there's no pleasing some people and when the people in question have to face global hatred and the drive to exterminate them, I can't say that hypersensitivity is entirely unjustified. Still, I have to admit that I myself felt no small annoyance at the great hostility the film faced from certain corners of the Jewish community. I suppose the Christian duty is to be quick to forgive. That's all I'll say on this nasty business.

I'm an old-fashioned sort of guy, raised in the belief that a man's tears should be rare and bought at a high price. I know that doesn't jibe with the idea that modern men should be freer with their emotions, but that's the kind of person I am. The reason I say this is because I want to establish that I cry rarely. I'm not ashamed to admit that when I saw this film in theaters, tears were streaming down my face most of the time. Even rewatching it on the small screen for the purpose of this review, it was a challenge to remain dry-eyed. That's how impactful this film is for me. If you're a devout Christian, it's likely to have a similar effect on you. If not, I can't say, but I doubt you can walk away without being affected by it.

As a parting note, to the one reviewer at the time who complained that this film didn't focus more on Christ's ministry, I'd like to point out that the movie's title is The Passion of the Christ, not The Life and Teachings of the Christ. If you want that, there's a book I can recommend for you.

Rating:
Treasure It