Movie Review: The Passion of the Christ (2004)

[Dave Gray]

The Passion of the Christ (2004)

Premise: Follows Jesus on his path to crucifixion.

Rating: Effective.

I never saw this movie when it came out, but I remember it being controversial.  It is INCREDIBLY violent and graphic.  The majority of the runtime isn't spent with characters, but plays out like torture.  I personally found that decision to be worthwhile.  The torture is kinda the point and the small scope of the story (only telling the moments between Jesus getting arrested and his death) made it an effective piece of storytelling.

Background about me: I'm an atheist, so I'm watching this more as a movie fan that a true believer.  However, I was raised Catholic and attended church regularly, so I and am no stranger to the stations of the cross.  This movie is basically a live action version of the stained-glass windows you see in a church.

This movie isn't trying to have a narrative.  It literally shows the stations...wiping his face, dropping the cross, etc.  All of it is surrounded by serious graphic beatings.  This is intercut a few times with some flashbacks of the very basic teachings or showing his relationship with his disciples who mourn with him.  Oh, also, it's in Aramaic (and a little Italian).  Even if you're not into subtitled films, it almost doesn't matter here.  This isn't dialogue driven.  Jesus doesn't say a whole lot.

I don't know if this is a negative thing or not, but it's heavy-handed in its portrayal of both the violence and the torturers...as well as the crowd.  It's a lot of slow motion yelling and whipping.  There isn't a lot of nuance to the performances.  Those carrying out the execution, aside from Pontius Pilate, don't seem to have a lot of gray area in how they're portrayed.  They are sadistic, as is much of the crowd cheering his demise.

One of my favorite aspects of the film is the sole artistic flare: The Devil.  There is an understated, odd character that represents the devil, roaming amongst the masses.  It's a little creepy, a little seductive, but not super in-your-face.  It was a good way of physically depicting temptation.

I did find the flashbacks to Jesus' teachings to be a little strange.  The movie isn't really interested in creating fully fleshed out characters or relationships, so it's odd to see just a snippet of Jesus holding bread and talking about how they have to eat him.  Also, when he talks about his father, it's just weird sounding in the first person.  Granted, I'm not a believer, but in a vacuum, that stuff seems pretty hocus-pocusey, as the film doesn't set it up.

I think this is an unavoidable negative, but the film is one-note.  Jesus is pretty much always in agony.  Mary is always crying.  The Romans are always laughing and spitting.  This isn't a movie with highs and lows.

To end on a high note, I do think that the message, because of the limited scope, is very clear.  You feel for Jesus, as he's just getting brutalized for 2 hours....and the crowd slowly starts to feel remorse, because all the while, he's doing it for them.  He's apologizing for their behavior and loving his persecutors.  It's a well-defined point that's shown and supported.

[masterfins]

I saw this movie in the theaters when it first came out, and found it to be very gripping.  Another note, when it came out Jews felt it was anti-semetic, in that they didn't feel it accurately portrayed the Jews.  I watched it again a few years ago, seem to recall we discussed it in this forum.  You have to be in the right mood to watch it, but I think it was very well made.

[CF DolFan]

It's been a really long time since I've seen it but as a Christian I really liked the movie in it's portrayal of the crucifixion. Seems like it pretty much represented the Bible's account about as closely as they could. I can't see the movie getting people "saved" but for Bible Believers it really brings His sacrifice to life.

when it came out Jews felt it was anti-semetic, in that they didn't feel it accurately portrayed the Jews. 

I remember that but I wouldn't expect Jews to get the fact that they were just the tool to bring about His sacrifice. Jesus died because we are sinners and not because the religious leaders wanted Him gone. In the same way some vaccinated people are turning on non vaccinated it is really easy to get caught up in hysteria. 

[Sunstroke]

I remember that but I wouldn't expect Jews to get the fact that they were just the tool to bring about His sacrifice. Jesus died because we are sinners and not because the religious leaders wanted Him gone.

I get a good chuckle watching a person of one religion talking about how another religion is wrong.  The arrogance of the devout is without question.

And, for what it's worth, there were no "facts" in your quote there. Belief? OK...  Faith-based opinion? Sure, that's fitting, but facts? Those require verifiable proof, or at the very-very-very least, a preponderance of evidence to support it.

In regards to the movie...not bad for a big-budget snuff film.

[Fau Teixeira]

In regards to the movie...not bad for a big-budget snuff film.

I watched a bit of it years ago but my impression was that it was gratuitous torture porn with very little other substance

[Dolphster]

I watched a bit of it years ago but my impression was that it was gratuitous torture porn with very little other substance

Yeah, same here.  Without trying to step on anyone's religious feelings, but it seemed to me that it was just a really long torture scene without much else going on and was kind of designed to incite anger and sadness in Christians.  Full disclosure, I didn't watch the whole thing and I'm sure the fact that I'm an atheist prejudiced my viewing of it. 

[Phishfan]

I don't think I watched the entire thing. I expect I didn't.

[Dave Gray]

Oddly enough, I don't think my atheism affected my viewing of the film at all.  To the movie's credit, it doesn't really rely on dogma to tell the story, insofar as you need to believe.  It wasn't really about that.  It was a story about sacrifice and loving your persecutor, which I think has merit regardless of your faith.

[CF DolFan]

I get a good chuckle watching a person of one religion talking about how another religion is wrong.  The arrogance of the devout is without question.

And, for what it's worth, there were no "facts" in your quote there. Belief? OK...  Faith-based opinion? Sure, that's fitting, but facts? Those require verifiable proof, or at the very-very-very least, a preponderance of evidence to support it.

In regards to the movie...not bad for a big-budget snuff film.

No, sorry. Your chuckle was in vain. I get you are going for the "gotcha" funny moment but as usual ... you are wrong.  Jesus was persecuted through the Jews and crucified by Pontius Pilate. That isn't really up for debate.

[Spider-Dan]

Jesus was persecuted through the Jews and crucified by Pontius Pilate. That isn't really up for debate.

Did historical Jesus really exist? The evidence just doesn't add up.

Perhaps you mean "that isn't really up for debate" among Christians, in the same sense that "Mohammed was the prophet of Allah, the one true god" isn't really up for debate among Muslims.

[CF DolFan]

This really, really sucks because I can't post what I want. Just read "The Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel if you actually want to put Jesus on trial for whether he lived, died, and performed miracles on earth. Plenty of earthly evidence in there.  Lee graduated with a law degree from Yale, became legal editor of the Chicago Tribune and set out to prove Jesus was fake to his wife. Ultimately when faced with the facts he became a believer. This is him putting that evidence on trial.

[Spider-Dan]

Why would that story be any more compelling than any other evangelical tale of redemption?  There are hundreds of thousands of Christians with law degrees in America; why is that guy any different?

Strangely enough, even though The Case For Christ (about Lee Strobel's amazing conversion based solely on Hard Evidence) was published in 1998, he had already published two other books in 1993 (Inside the Mind of Unchurched Harry and Mary) and 1994 (What Jesus Would Say) about the wonders of Christ's message for this earth.

How lucky for us that he waited to publish his amazing scientific tale of the truth of Christ until AFTER he had already started ministering the gospel!  Truly a miracle.

As far as the actual content of the book goes, this seems like it might be an interesting parallel read.  It's easy to find an atheist to refute Christian arguments, but I imagine it's a lot more entertaining when another Christian - and a New Testament scholar, no less - does it:

[Tenshot13]

Why don't we go back to talking about the movie instead of picking apart people's sentence structure and seething about Christianity. 

[Sunstroke]

No, sorry. Your chuckle was in vain. I get you are going for the "gotcha" funny moment but as usual ... you are wrong.  Jesus was persecuted through the Jews and crucified by Pontius Pilate. That isn't really up for debate.

Actually, I was going for the "straight up honesty in your face" moment.

And yes, it is obviously up for debate, as it is being debated by people every day. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be called "religion," it would be called "History"...and you could prove it  scientifically, without using the word "Faith."

[Dolphster]

How lucky for us that he waited to publish his amazing scientific tale of the truth of Christ until AFTER he had already started ministering the gospel!  Truly a miracle.

You blasphemer with your truth and facts!   There is a hell of a lot of profit to be made in the name of the Lord.