| |
|||
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|
The Passion of the Christ
The guards are on their way to arrest him, and Jesus prays in the dark, misty garden. He is trembling and weeping, and begging his Father to “take this cup away” from him—but only if it is in His will. At this moment, Satan comes to Jesus and asks, reasonably, “How can one man save all of their souls?” Jesus spends the rest of The Passion of the Christ answering this question, as we are shown in painstaking detail his “cup”—from trial to torture to the cross to the resurrection. Never has the nature of Jesus’ death been shown in such excruciating detail. Never has a man been shown in such agony under such tremendous abuse as Jesus in this film. Never has a more important movie been made for Christians, because it gives a clearer depiction of what their “Savior” did for them than any other visual interpretation of Christ ever made. But at the same time, never has there been a more thought-provoking film about Jesus for non-Christians who want to know what he stood for and what he was willing to suffer for his beliefs. Here was a man whose mission in life, he believed, was to die a terrible, horrible death on the cross. This film shows that such a conviction is worth listening to. Well, that’s the gist of it. A review any more thorough could really only be a description. Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ is not a film that painstakingly details the life and ministry of Christ, such as Franco Zeffirelli’s Jesus of Nazareth. It is not a big-budgeted, DeMille-styled Hollywood epic with an emphasis on spotting the celebrity cameos, such as The Greatest Story Ever Told. It is not a literal adaptation of one of the gospels, such as Pier Pasonlini’s The Gospel According to St. Matthew. It does not attempt to dive into the nature of Christ’s divinity and hypothesize on Jesus' dual nature of man and God, such as Martin Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ. Instead, Gibson begins his film long after Jesus’ sermons have been told, and though he mixes flashbacks in to break the relentless images of violence (such as the wonderful splicing of the crucifixion and the Lord’s Supper), this is a movie about the suffering of Christ, and every scene brings us back to this realization. Gibson makes no statement except for the alleged utterance of the Pope after screening the film: “It is at it was.” What one believes about Jesus is a choice each viewer must make, as every character in The Passion that comes in contact with him must make. One can accept him, condemn him, admire him, or put faith in him. Gibson is not trying to mystify us with a profound message of his own. He is simply letting Jesus’ ordeal speak for itself. I will say a word about the alleged anti-Semitism, which seems to be the media’s favorite topic regarding Gibson and his film. As far as I can tell, there is no anti-Semitism in The Passion of the Christ. Gibson in no way attacks any certain group; Jesus himself states that he is freely giving his life away for the ransom for humanity’s sins. That Jesus is Jewish, and that his people were Jewish, is not the point. Besides that, the Jewish community is presented in a fair and balanced manner; some in support of Jesus and some against him. Certainly the Pharisees and the Teachers of the Law want Jesus dead at any cost, and they pressure the Romans to give in; however, they are not presented as evil because of their nationality or their beliefs. Rather, their flaws are in the fact that they are willing to turn one of their own people in to the Romans to be brutally killed, when they should have judged him fairly and demonstrated less malice. Consider the scene when Pilate asks Ciaphas, the head of the Pharisees, why he wants to crucify the “king of the Jews.” Ciaphas’s answer is a nonchalant, “We have no king but Caesar,” and Pilate is not impressed. Thus, their sin is cruelty and dishonesty. In no way do these few represent the whole of the Jewish population or their religion. On the same level, Romans are cast in a negative light for persecuting the Jewish people. They spit on, curse at, and lash their whips over the Jewish onlookers with as much scorn and disrespect as they show Jesus. In a way, by contrasting Jesus’ suffering, death, and resurrection to the cruelty that the Romans showed all Jews, Gibson turns Christ into a metaphor for the suffering of the Jewish people. Like Jesus, his race has faced oppression, suffering, and pain at the hands of captors. Like Jesus, they withstand these hardships and, in the end, rise from their ashes as stronger people. In that sense, The Passion of the Christ is one of the least anti-Semitic films ever made. So what else is there to talk about? I suppose that I could discuss the acting, which is as superb as one would expect. Characters are identified by name, and those of us who have seen the many film versions of Christ nod as we recognize them. We are given glimpses into the lives of some of the more popular characters, such as Pilate (Hristo Naumov Shopov), Mother Mary (Maia Morgenstern), Magdalene (Monica Belluci), and, in the film’s most powerful moments, Simon (Jarreth Merz), who was forced to help Jesus carry his cross. All of these actors are convincing in their roles, but I would argue that the acting isn’t crucial to the film’s success; after all, the effectiveness of the cast basically centers on whether or not they can successfully be in the constant, horrified state of watching Jesus in agony, and who wouldn’t be? Others have complained that the Romans torturing Jesus are too comical and over-the-top, bearing more resemblance to the Kurgan in Highlander than actual human beings. I speculate that a touch of insanity would be a key requirement for a person whose job is to mercilessly torture someone the way that Jesus was tortured. The
heart of the film, and the only character that truly matters,
is Jesus. He must believe in what he is doing. He must be convinced
that to die this terrible death is the will of God. He must truly
be motivated by the conviction that his sacrifice will mean the
redemption of mankind. Thus, even in his greatest hour of weakness,
Jesus must exhibit the greatest human strength possible. As Jesus,
Jim Caviezel portrays all of these convictions. Here is a man
determined to see his mission carried through to the end, and
even as he his beaten down more than he can bear, his eyes never
steer from the path that he has chosen. He follows it passionately.
Jesus does what he does to pay the price for the sins of mankind,
in order to prove his Father’s love for them. On that note,
it doesn’t matter whether you believe Jesus was the son
of God, a great teacher, or simply a mythological figure. It doesn’t
matter what your religious beliefs are, or if you have any at
all. Jesus’ motivation for his sacrifice—for all of
its brutality—remains the greatest love story ever told.
Cast: Newmark Film Groups Presents
an Icon Films Production. Directed by Mel Gibson. Written by Gibson
and Benedict Fitzgerald. Rated R, for graphic violence. Running
time: 126 minutes. Original United States Theatrical Release date:
February 25, 2004. Questions? Comments? E-mail me: danel_the_tinman@hotmail.com |
||
