The Passion of the Christ

First off, I'd just like to commend Eddie on his thorough review of this film. I felt he analyzed it from every possible angle, especially considering the media storm surrounding it. Kudos to a non-judgmental review weighing the film on its merits alone.

That being said, this film has evoked an extremely visceral reaction, good or bad, from everyone I have read of or spoken to. I am no different.

Considering that this film depicts one of the cornerstones of my own strong faith, I was affected to an extreme degree. It was amazing to see just what I have been given, and the great lengths that a pretty respected filmmaker and actor went to in putting such a personal vision up on the screen.

So here's the question:

Do we think that Mel Gibson will continue to make mainstream movies? Can we see him doing a Lethal Weapon 5 type of thing, or will he stick to epic themes and narratives? I guess the question could also be even more severe: will Mel ever work in this town again?

What do you think? :D

Sean (hiding his can-opener and can of worms behind his back)

I agree with Sean that the review was great in its analysis and composition. My single complaint, if one can call it that, is that I thought that "I am not a Christian" sounded one too many times. It was as if Eddie was trying to defend himself.

I would think that Mel Gibson will (and should) keep doing all sorts of movies.

Sasha

[Post edited by Sashaofspain on Mar 29, 2004]

I just saw "The Passion of the Christ" today and I am still speechless. It was quite simply, one of the best movies I have ever seen. I am a Christian, and I am not ashamed to admit it, but I feel that non-Christian people could still get a lot out of this movie. From the beginning until the end, I was on the edge of my seat with this movie. I was digging my fingers into the seat and trying not to cry at moments in this film, and I have a high tolerance for violence (I am a huge fan of good horror films and Tarantino movies). The violence is brutal and realistic but it is necessary in a movie about the crucifixion of Jesus and I believe the violence was not overkill because Jesus really did go through all of that torture. Crucifixion was designed to be the most painful, drawn-out death possible, and that is how it is depicted here, but it is appropriate for people to understand that (according to the Christian belief I have) Jesus went through all of this pain and torment so that we did not have to. I was surprised at the appearance of the devil and demons in this movie, but it put an edge on the film it may not have had before. The actress who played the devil was a woman, but she was androgynous so she looked like she could be a man or a woman. After Judas betrays Jesus, he is followed and teased by little demon children, which was just a metaphorical presentation of Judas' inner demons after betraying Jesus. As in the Bible, he hangs himself out of guilt with a rope found on a dead donkey nearby. Was that, perhaps, the same donkey Jesus rode in on on Palm Sunday as he entered Jerusalem? Also, there were little flashbacks into the life of Jesus as he is being beaten and forced to carry the cross. These flashbacks reveal the stories of Mother Mary, Mary Magdalene, the disciples, and the basic history of Jesus such as him being a carpenter and the Last Supper. But, obviously, the focus of the film is his capture from the garden of Gethsemane and his crucifxion and resurrection. I won't reveal how they show the resurrection, but I will say that I don't think they could have portrayed it in a better way. It was beautiful and dramatic. Also, there were amazing little moments in the movie, like the tear of God falling on the Earth after Jesus died. All in all, I would reccomend this movie to everyone, Christian or not, and I believe that it is probably the best film about Jesus ever filmed.

I have always admired Mel Gibson as an actor, but I now believe that he is a fabulous director as well. After BRAVEHEART and now PASSION OF THE CHRIST, I definetly would support him if he chose to direct more films with controversial themes. While he is a Catholic and I am a Lutheran, I still believe that his depiction of Jesus was NOT blasphemous or disrespectful to any religion. I also admire him for being open with his religion. With the film SIGNS in which he portrays a former priest coping with the death of his wife and the testing of his faith, I was really touched to see a celebrity that is not afraid to let people know about his convictions. He took a real gamble making THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST and he put his bankability and career on the line to make this movie. Luckily, his film was great and successful so he is probably still a hot commodity in Hollywood. Frankly, I'm glad and I hope to see him direct more films. He is very courageous to admit his faith and make a film about Jesus, so I applaud him. Films about different religions often fail or are just bad, the only other one I like is THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR was too goofy and overly 70's, and all the others are cheaply made or don't convey important themes, etc.

I enjoyed Eddie's review and thought he made many good points. I probably would have also given this movie a 9, or more likely even a 10 rating. Films like this don't come out often. I'm glad to see that many people enjoyed this movie, I myself thought it was one of the most powerful movies ever made. I think that any controversy this movie faces will ultimately be forgotten and this movie will be seen as a classic in the future. After all, how can you make a film about any religion without controversy? You can't please everyone on a subject matter as important as this one. THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST, perhaps the only other great film about Jesus, was much more controversial than this because it showed how Jesus MAY have been, including a possible marriage and sexual relationship with Mary Magdalene, and it showed Jesus "last temptation" as in: What would have happened if Jesus decided not to bear the cross? While the film will offend some, it is very intriguing and provocative and I reccomend it to everyone who did or did not enjoy THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST.

I also think Gibson will continue to direct films, but they will be few and far between because he takes so much time and effort to make his films, which is a great thing.

I reccomend everyone, Christian or not to see THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST. It is a very rewarding experience, and the violence, while brutal and real, is all perfectly utilized to tell the story of Jesus.

Sean,
Thank you for agreeing with my perspective. The way I see it, we as Christians have to be open-minded, for The Bible was not written by God, but it was written by men. Men make mistakes. As you can see, different books and passages of The Bible contradict each other, and the same story between two people is not always identical. Also, some of these men had their own agenda, and what they chose or chose not to write was at their discretion. They could have left something out to further their own agenda. As I said, where did all the stories of Jesus' childhood and adolescence go? ANyway, whatever was chosen to be left out, all that is important is he message of God's grace, and that is still intact, so the other stuff isn't crucial. But it makes me wonder.

TGP,

Sounds like you have an incredible grasp of of your faith. Thank you so much for putting your beliefs out there to help others understand the true tenets of Christianity, the Truth that goes beyond denominations and speculation.

Some of the things I really liked in the Passion were Gibson's renderings of certain classical motifs such as the Madonna and Child (although his was definitely NOT your usual expression but a reversal) and the Pieta. It felt as though these shots were almost painted up on the screen- to be taken down, framed and displayed. His consistent and affecting directorial vision alone should be able to keep him in the spotlight.

I love what TGP said about The Last Temptation of Christ. I haven't seen it in a long time, since before I was saved, so I need to see it again. If you want to find a group of people who offend easily, it's Christians. It would be great if we could all just remember that God sent Jesus so that He could experience firsthand what we all experience. That He cares so much that He was willing to suffer such an excruciatingly painful death just to have a relationship with us.

As Temptation shows, Jesus was a man, so He could speculate on possible outcomes of His decisions. If faced with what He endured, would I harbor the hope of a possible future that I knew wouldn't come to pass? Bet your booty I would. This is what Temptation alludes to: what if? Nothing more. To take offense at this is to be looking at only part of the piece, and not the whole.

It would be great if we could all focus the biggest message of the Bible: God's love for us and His want of relationship with us. But that's not the case. We Christians often get caught up in the minutae and forget the overriding Truth.

To me, being closed-minded and Christian are antithetical, hypocritical. It seems to me that putting all of your trust into something you cannot possibly prove in a real world sense is the very definition of open-minded. I pray that we as Christians can keep from closing off ourselves and our minds, only feeling safe in our churches.

There's a whole wide world out there, and we live in it. Time to step up and recognize that. One of the ways to do that is through art, and I thank Mel Gibson for bringing that back to the foreground.

Sean (puttin' the Bible down. No more proselytizing today)

TGP,

It's cool, nobody said anything about being "too religious". :)

I hope that my review of "The Passion" convinced you that I am open-minded about such things. My attitude has always been that, the more I learn, the more I realize how little I know. Therefore, I'm usually eager to try new things in order to get a sense of what's going on in the world.

What you write of "The Last Temptation" makes a lot of sense, even if I haven't seen the movie. Thanks for the feedback!

Eddie

To Eddie:
You must keep a very open mind with THE LAST TEMPTATION. It is very different from the PASSION in many ways, and while THE PASSION is much more realistic and closer to the Bible, THE LAST TEMPTATION shows a possible outcome of an alternate decision that Jesus could have made. I have always learned that Jesus is completely God and completely human. If he is completely human, than he has conflicting thoughts and feelings just like us. For example, in the teenage years we all did stupid and reckless things. What's to say that Jesus didn't do stupid and reckless things as well? The Bible has no record of Jesus as a boy or teen, except for one well-known story when he was 12 years old and he wandered off to the temple without his parents knowledge and made them angry. The Bible goes from Jesus birth to him in his mid-30's. What happened in those missing years? If Jesus, Mary and Joseph were in a typical Jewsih household, than Jesus may have had many brothers and sisters, but we'll never know for sure. If Jesus had human impulses, perhaps him and Mary Magdalene were married and had a sexual relationship. THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST explores these possbilities, and is not really based on the Bible as much as it is based on the book "The Last Tempatation of Christ" by Nikos Kazantzakis, which is a very good book as well. The most intriguing part of the film and the book is when Christ is being crucified, and the people below are saying, "If you are God, why don't you just get off of the cross?" In the LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST, he does just that, and he ends up leading a normal life with Mary Magdalene and children. But is it all a dream or did he really refuse the burden of the cross?

Many people found THE LAST TEMPTATION blasphemous because it presented someone else's idea of what could have happened, not what did happen. So, THE PASSION is much more realistic and accurate, and the crucifixion is much better done, but THE LAST TEMPTATION is very interesting and worth a look. LAST TEMPTATION is more food for thought and not a literal adaptation like THE PASSION. Open-minded religious scholars will love both films. Also, unlike THE PASSION, LAST TEMPTATION uses very famous actors like Willem Dafoe as Jesus, Harvey Keitel as Judas, and even David Bowie as Pontius Pilate :)! Either way, both films are great and important to modern film. Try to find the Criterion Collection edition, the extras are very informative. I hope my sypnosis helped everyone.

P.S. I'm sorry if I seem preachy or know-it-all about the Bible, but my mother and my grandfather are both pastors and my family is quite active in the church, but we are not religious fanatics or "Bible-thumpers" like Piper Laurie as Carrie's mom or anything! :)

TGP,

Wow, I'm very surprised to hear that you like both "The Passion" and "The Last Temptation". You're the first one I've met to admit to liking both films. Everyone else seems to like one or the other. (I haven't seen "The Last Temptation" yet, but I hope to see it soon.)

Eddie

I would like to thank everyone for being so generous towards my review of "The Passion".

Sasha, I know what you mean when you refer to my repeated mentions of my non-Christian status. Believe it or not, in a perfect world, I wouldn't have felt the need to repeat myself. However, as I was writing the review, I realized that I needed to frame my statements in some sort of context so that people would not misunderstand my words. Still, I'm glad and grateful that people have responded so well to my review.

Again, thanks everyone! :)

I keep wondering. Since Mel Gibson has made so much money on this movie, I wonder what he'll choose to do with it. Will he donate it or buy a new car with it? It's none of my business and it's his money but the message of the film will be lost if the money made is wasted on cheap merchandising or paying for someone's mansion. I know nobody knows the answer to this question, it's just been on my mind the past few days.

Sashaofspain,
Once again you put it all in perspective. Thank you for you comment. Gibson funded this film out of his own pocket and definetly earned the money he made while spreading a great message, so it really does not matter how he spends it. As I aid in my past post, it really is none of my business and I'm just really glad he made such a great movie with a wonderful message that can spread to people of all faiths. Once again, thanks for you comment :)

I think that, even though this film is very successful in theaters that it may be a failure whenever it is released to DVD. Many people that enjoyed the movie admitted that they'd probably never watch it again because of the violence. Also, I don't know how they would handle the release or special features or lack thereof on a DVD. There would be conflicts of "would adding special features be in bad taste?" Will they release it on DVD at all? Also, if the movie gets nominated or wins any awards, which it should, the people who think the film is anti-Semitic or over violent will fire up all the controversy again. Personally, I'd love to have the film on DVD to watch once in a while as a reminder of my faith and of what I believe in, but others will never watch it again. So, what do you think the fate of this film on DVD will be?

TGP:

I am sure many have thought about this. What I think is that it is really nobody´s business. Why would the message of the film be lost if the producers decided to keep their money instead of donating it, or donated only a small portion? It is no sin to be rich, unless you live in the country that strives to be communist. Because the days of the Soviet Union are long gone.

Do you know that the Church leaders, both Catholic and Protestant, consider this film "the best opportunity [to spread Gospel] in the last 30 years, one that may never again come along"? Gibson already has done more for the Christianity than most other believers. What he decides to do with the money he earned is his own choice.

Of course, $200 mil. is a lot and that is what makes people wonder. But nobody is stopping nobody, go to Hollywood and do the same.
Sasha

Yeah, that happens a lot with translations. For example, in my review, I noted that angels are supposed to be genderless, yet when translating texts into English, the word "he" was used because English does not have a neutral/neuter pronoun. Therefore, we get used to the masculine form even though some things should be "it".

TGP,

Regarding driving the nails through Christ's hands and not his wrists, when the bible was translated, the greek word for "hand" actually includes the arm from the fingertips to the elbow. Generically, hand was used in translations, and as such, most of the classic artistic deptictions show Christ with nails through his palms.

Since it has been translated this way for so long, many churches have simply taught it this way, even though the translation is too limiting. Rest assured that the vast majority of churches understand that the most accurate depiction is through the wrist.

So, you are correct. I'm sure Gibson went with a more literal interpretation for this piece even though he made many other artistic choices.

Sean (no Bible scholar. at least no priest collar)

Sean is right, and TGP is right. The Passion must have been a difficult one to watch (I will only get to see it in the next four to six weeks when it comes to Europe), so not many will want to watch it over and over. But others will because the movie means so much to so many. Plus, by the time it comes out on DVD it will have made much more in royalties. The analytics are forcasting that it will make about twice as much in international theaters as it did domestically. Latin America will be very welcoming in accepting the film because of the large Christian audience as, of course, Spain and Italy. Plus, since it is a "period drama", the movie may not be dated so it would be replayed in the theaters once every few years.

The churches are already using this opportunity. Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, one of the largest national organizations, incourages its congregations to buy tickets for distribution among the guests in hope to attract more members.

Must be a good movie.


[Post edited by Sashaofspain on Mar 25, 2004]

Well, I hope you're right, and I agree with you. I certainly want to buy it as well.

I just noticed a pretty big inaccuracy in the film. During the crucifixion scene, they pound the nails into Jesus' palms of his hands. But, the palms of the hands cannot support weight of the whole body for the flesh would just rip and the body would fall off the cross. So when crucifixion was done they would usually pound the nails into the wrists or lower. You'd think that with all the research that Gibson did that he would have discovered this. Anyway, could anybody shed some light on this?
THANK YOU FOR REPLYING AND BEING HELPFUL WITH ALL MY COMMENTS!

(I learned about crucifixion from history classes and Confirmation in the church)

I think this film will have a robust run on DVD. Personally, I want to make sure my kids see it. Being that they are still very young (daughter: 2yrs; son: 7mos), now certainly is not the time. I look forward to being able to watch it with them, pause it, talk with them about what is going on. Overall, I want to help them understand not so much the film, but what Jesus did for them.

Also, the DVD will be a huge boon to churches. I think that when it comes out on DVD, you'll see churches holding events where they screen the film. I can see it being screened annually around Easter as most movies about Christ are. Look for a big box office boost this coming Easter.

As far as extras go, there are many avenues to take that would not necessarily go into the making of the film (although Gibson has already made a making of doc for PAX TV, a small faith-based network). There could be documentaries on Christ's life and teachings. Many times episodes from the History Channel are added to discs, much like the History to Hollywood special on the Passion. Also, Gibson likes commentaries, so I would expect one on this disc where he expounds on his own justifications for some of the artistic licenses he took. I think this will most likely be a very healthy release.

As far as awards go, I think the anti-semitism line will have played out a great deal by then. Most of the uproar came before the film's release and has pretty much petered out by now. The biggest thing it has going against it at awards time is its early release. February movies can be forgotten pretty easily by November/December. Hopefully the buzz this film has created will float it that far.

I am definitely going to buy it, and I think you will be surprised at how many people do.

Sean (mental note: DVDs after tithe...DVDs after tithe...) :D

Eddie,

You're right on there.

The New Testament was originally written in Greek, then translated into Latin. Most of the subsequent English translations (King James, etc.) were translated directly from the Latin which brought up most of the translation discrepancies sometimes to the point of altering meaning. Most of your newer translations (New International Version for example) have actually gone back to the Greek root to bring as much of the original intent as possible.

Of course, as Bill Murray and Sofia Coppola can tell you, quite a bit gets Lost in the Translation! :D

Sean (is that cheese coming out of my keyboard?)

The Passion just opened in Europe. Very excited.

BBC said that even before the UK premiere the profits have risen to $300 mil.

Does anyone know when this will be released onto DVD and what the DVD will contain? I can't wait to see this film again and be able to have this emotional experience whenever I want. There are times when I need to be reminded of what I believe in, and what better way than this movie? ANyay, if anyone knoes the DVD details, please share them.

At this point, it's just known that Fox will release the movie on DVD. There are rumors of a re-release around Christmas-time, so the DVD may be a long ways off.

Still, Mel Gibson has done at least one audio commentary in the past ("Braveheart"), so at the least you can expect a yak track.