Movie Review

The Passion of the Christ

Just as beauty is in the eye of its beholder, the significance of Mel Gibson?s latest film, ?The Passion of the Christ,? is in the mind of its audience. The film is a violent recounting of the last hours of Jesus Christ, which is also known by the Christian faith as The Passion. The span of time is from the Last Supper up to Jesus? death on the cross.

Having been brought up in the Catholic faith, I am aware of this biblical story and walking into the theater, I had something of a bias toward the movie. This isn?t bias rooted in the ridiculous controversy that has surrounded the film (many claim it is ?anti-Semitic,? which it is clearly not), but rather it?s more of a spiritual and religious bias. ?The Passion? is a film that relies heavily on the reaction of its audience, as it has no clear message or theme ? that?s left up to you to decide.

Gibson has created an authentic, realistic, and brutal film, which I believe he intended to do. Perhaps it was his artistic intention to leave the emotional part of the film up to the audience, but for that I can?t say his film is moving (nor does it try to be). Instead, ?The Passion of the Christ? plays like a two-hour visual interpretation of the well-known biblical story, the reaction to which is not hinted to whatsoever. Visually, the film succeeds; emotionally, there?s very little to credit.

?The Passion? is the kind of film that relies on people to walk in with a certain amount of knowledge of a certain subject; in this instance, religious affiliation is the key. I walked in with this knowledge and I?m sure that others in a converse situation will be somewhat lost. Those who are looking for this film to enlighten them on Christianity need to find a different film, as this won?t.

I attend church each week, and the weekend before Easter, the story of The Passion is read aloud by a few people reading given parts. As I grew up surrounded by this faith, I have personally developed images in my own mind of this particular story. For this, ?The Passion of the Christ? is nothing more to me than a take on the scripture. With blood, gore, and stiff characterization (walk in with your own idea of Jesus because you won?t be given much of his believed character), the film may be commendable in its realism, but spiritually, there?s very little.

However, this opinion could be sharply testified against by others. I?m counting on people to have different reactions to the film, as Gibson may have been intended to elicit. Some may be moved by the portrayal while others will be left cold; I left in-between and lukewarm at best.

The filmmaking aspects of the production (direction, writing, acting, etc.) are satisfactory, though I believe Gibson?s direction is rather stiff and a tad too enamored with the film?s strenuous and violent stretches. Jim Caviezel?s portrayal of Jesus is, to put it simply, amazing as he vividly expresses the pain, suffering, and endurance of the savior. He doesn?t have much dialogue, but Caviezel (whom I believe is among Hollywood?s most underrated actors) is skilled enough that he delivers emotional performance regardless. It is undoubtedly a demanding physical role, but can you imagine the mental aspect in portraying the single most admired being ever?

Sadly, ?The Passion of the Christ? is an unmoving cinematic event. Go in expecting something earth shattering or faithfully inspired, and like me, you may feel somewhat betrayed. Released on Ash Wednesday, the first day in an important Christian season of Lent, many may flock to see this film and feel something (whatever it may be). Granted, not everyone will agree with my opinion of the film, seeing as though it is so very personal; it?s hard for me to recommend or plea against seeing this film since everyone is subject to differ in opinion. Unlike most movies released each year, ?The Passion? is something that leaves its audience to react, giving little reason (elsewhere) to be enthralled.

I was not moved nor particularly impressed with Mel Gibson?s latest film. In some ways, it feels like his way of alienating other religions than his own (Gibson is a devout Traditional Catholic), but on the other hand, ?The Passion? may have been made in order to reach out to those with his similar beliefs. An answer either way doesn?t change the fact that the film is in its own way bias, as is each member of its audience. People walk in with different religious beliefs (something as concrete and inarguable as politics, if not more so) and will leave with different opinions.

Spoken as a critic, ?The Passion? isn?t exceptional or altogether impressive; beyond a strong portrayal of Jesus, the film offers little. As a violent depiction of the title story, it is sufficient in being realistic, but does that necessarily make up for the fact that the film is not very good? No, not really. Did I like it? Kind of ? will others like it? Maybe, as it all depends. Yet even if I?m satisfied or unsatisfied with ?The Passion,? it?s hard not to commend a film like this.

With any interest in the film and sufficient religious familiarity, I?d suggest seeing ?The Passion of the Christ? even if just for the sake of seeing it and discussing. Though mediocre from my personal standpoint, the film could be glorious to others. Was it a measure of my spiritual faith? No, the film isn?t good enough to be as such, but one thing is for sure: the book is better.

Stephen's Grade: B-

A	8.7%
B	43.5%
C	47.8%
D	0.0%
F	0.0%