The Passion of the Christ

7

MattC.Sep 2, 2004

It's virtually impossible to get a balanced and objective view about this film. Cynical yes, but I've no doubt that many people will have decided what they think about this film before actually watching it. Caviezel is excellent as It's virtually impossible to get a balanced and objective view about this film. Cynical yes, but I've no doubt that many people will have decided what they think about this film before actually watching it. Caviezel is excellent as Jesus and although theres very little dialogue he's an actor who can say a great deal without speech. Elsewhere, the rest of the casting/acting is rather sterile, Pilate manages to hold his ground but otherwise it's all rather uninspired. Maybe it's a fear of taking the limelight from the charachter of Jesus, maybe it's just poor direction. Speaking of which, Gibson is a rather inconsistant director; some scenes are excellent whilst others are horribly amateurish. Also, no matter how sincere his intentions may be, this film has a thick layer of Hollywood not far under the surface and as a result whatever sincerity intended is degraded somehow. Watching it on the big screen I just couldn't get involved and found myself whistling 'Always Look On The Bright Side Of Life' in my head at the end. I also found myself being irritated by the assertion that Jesus had seemingly invented high tables with chairs. Watching the film on my television set I found that I was much more able to become absorbed. This is a film that you need to watch alone for full intensity and when the connection is there it is a rewarding film, this is a good, if not a little inconsistant, take on the greatest story ever told. It's also worth noting that accusations of this films Anti-Semitism are unfounded, some Jewish priests do try and stick up for Jesus during his 'trial', this is something that is conveniently ignored by some reviewers. At the end of the day, Jesus was put to death by his own people and had this not have occured then Christianity wouldn't have existed as we know it now. Therefore, in regards to this, any intelligent person would know not to judge a religion as ancient and established as Judaism.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

DanApr 19, 2004

Hey Get Real, maybe YOU SHOULD. Saving Private Ryan was different: The violence in THAT film had a point. The violence in THIS film serves NO PURPOSE. This is an absolute bloodfest with no artistic value to speak of. Oh but It's about Hey Get Real, maybe YOU SHOULD. Saving Private Ryan was different: The violence in THAT film had a point. The violence in THIS film serves NO PURPOSE. This is an absolute bloodfest with no artistic value to speak of. Oh but It's about the lord so I should give it a 10. But I won't.… Expand

1 of 5 users found this helpful

10

GetRealApr 17, 2004

People! A nun (Emmerich) who died in 1824 saw this in her dream "just the way it was", and wrote it down. What did you expect? you went in to see a movie about Christ's tortutre and crucifiction as seen in Sr. Emmerich's Dream? I People! A nun (Emmerich) who died in 1824 saw this in her dream "just the way it was", and wrote it down. What did you expect? you went in to see a movie about Christ's tortutre and crucifiction as seen in Sr. Emmerich's Dream? I bet all the ZEROs never read the book or even heard of it. How come no one cried "gory" or "anti-Aryan" about Saving Private Ryan, even the camera lens had blood on it. What does this say about all the ZEROs who will never know why christ suffered: Inmates were shown the movie in jails got its message and cried thier souls out. … Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

PatC.Apr 14, 2004

The gospels were not written for the screen, so all films about Jesus tend to lack the plot and character development elements generally considered necessary for a great film. The one notable exception, which involved Jesus only The gospels were not written for the screen, so all films about Jesus tend to lack the plot and character development elements generally considered necessary for a great film. The one notable exception, which involved Jesus only tangentially, was Ben Hur. Many Jesus flicks have been made, and recent depictions (Superstar, Last Temptation) invoke more realism, but now Gibson has trumped them all. Regardless of viewer sensibilities, Gibson is apparently the first filmmaker without a reading comprehension disorder to have read the gospels. As with all Gibson films, the characters are polarized. And the film relies heavily on presumed knowledge from other mediums in its focus on the hours of Jesus's death. Yet the Pope himself found this movie to be an authentic depiction of events, and he carries a staff from which hangs the road kill Jesus had been tortured into. This is not an anti-semitic film, although it is certainly anti-Pharisee. Apparently the Pharisee lobby is still alive, well, and very concerned about its image. Since the alleged events depicted occurred, the world has consisted of two kinds of people, those who find validity in the sacrifice Jesus made, and those who don't. From a secular viewpoint, this photoplay comes across as obsessive, brutal and pointless. For the believers, most will see this film as a masterpiece. I choose to consider it so, as no one has provided me a better explanation of my place in the scheme of things. … Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

RichardK.Apr 7, 2004

Great Movie. And for all the atheist posting and getting angry at a great film, Live with it, you go through it daily. Anyway, I think this movie was spot on, it is the truth, it is what happened. People definitely deserve to see a movie Great Movie. And for all the atheist posting and getting angry at a great film, Live with it, you go through it daily. Anyway, I think this movie was spot on, it is the truth, it is what happened. People definitely deserve to see a movie like this. This is one for the history books. Mel Gibson is a genius.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

DavidC.Mar 8, 2004

True! the movie was heart wrenching and you did feel you were beat up at the end. Though, it truly put the visual aspects to the words of the Bible. Everyone that I know that has seen the movie agrees that you will "Never" look at a True! the movie was heart wrenching and you did feel you were beat up at the end. Though, it truly put the visual aspects to the words of the Bible. Everyone that I know that has seen the movie agrees that you will "Never" look at a crucifixion the same way. Oh, as far as being Anti-Semitic YOU ARE WRONG! I left the movie, NOT angry at the Jewish people, NOT angry at the Romans, but thankful for what Christ has done! Thankful for What Jesus Has Done! … Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

MattS.Feb 29, 2004

This was solely a string of slowmo scenes tied together with some cheap brutality. Overall the movie should have lasted about 15 minutes but is drawn out over 2 hours because of the frequent flashbacks and slow motion. Near the end you are This was solely a string of slowmo scenes tied together with some cheap brutality. Overall the movie should have lasted about 15 minutes but is drawn out over 2 hours because of the frequent flashbacks and slow motion. Near the end you are pleading for Jesus not to fall anymore. Also it is clear that the film used cheap brutality in order to have some effect on the audience. A pig being tortured like that would have had the same gut-wrenching effect. Overall the film didn't have much content and Gibson tries to manipulate the Bible and the audience to make it somewhat interesting, but he fails. … Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

10

SJ.Feb 28, 2004

To reply to all that have said that this film is an invalid depiction of the death of christ; I have found that the movie follows scripture and does not stray from the fact that man is cruel and selfish. It allows the viewer to see the hate To reply to all that have said that this film is an invalid depiction of the death of christ; I have found that the movie follows scripture and does not stray from the fact that man is cruel and selfish. It allows the viewer to see the hate in man for what it is. There is no glorifying, nor downplaying what happened to Jesus, it is as it was written. Unfortunatley we are snobby little brats that take what we want from a "movie" and criticize each part for own "choice" of what happens next. As for the Jewish communities reply; this wouldnt be the first time something happened that anyone in the jewish religion couldnt stand up and admit to. It is as it written, this isnt a fairytale kids....... John 19 :: New International Version (NIV)...| This chapter | Next chapter John 19 Jesus Sentenced to be Crucified 1Then Pilate took Jesus and had him flogged. 2The soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head. They clothed him in a purple robe 3and went up to him again and again, saying, "Hail, king of the Jews!" And they struck him in the face. 4Once more Pilate came out and said to the Jews, "Look, I am bringing him out to you to let you know that I find no basis for a charge against him." 5When Jesus came out wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe, Pilate said to them, "Here is the man!" 6As soon as the chief priests and their officials saw him, they shouted, "Crucify! Crucify!" But Pilate answered, "You take him and crucify him. As for me, I find no basis for a charge against him." 7The Jews insisted, "We have a law, and according to that law he must die, because he claimed to be the Son of God." 8When Pilate heard this, he was even more afraid, 9and he went back inside the palace. "Where do you come from?" he asked Jesus, but Jesus gave him no answer. 10"Do you refuse to speak to me?" Pilate said. "Don't you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?" 11Jesus answered, "You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above. Therefore the one who handed me over to you is guilty of a greater sin." 12From then on, Pilate tried to set Jesus free, but the Jews kept shouting, "If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar." 13When Pilate heard this, he brought Jesus out and sat down on the judge's seat at a place known as the Stone Pavement (which in Aramaic is Gabbatha). 14It was the day of Preparation of Passover Week, about the sixth hour. "Here is your king," Pilate said to the Jews. 15But they shouted, "Take him away! Take him away! Crucify him!" "Shall I crucify your king?" Pilate asked. "We have no king but Caesar," the chief priests answered. 16Finally Pilate handed him over to them to be crucified. The Crucifixion 17So the soldiers took charge of Jesus. Carrying his own cross, he went out to the place of the Skull (which in Aramaic is called Golgotha). 18Here they crucified him, and with him two others--one on each side and Jesus in the middle. 19Pilate had a notice prepared and fastened to the cross. It read:|sc JESUS OF NAZARETH, THE KING OF THE JEWS. 20Many of the Jews read this sign, for the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the sign was written in Aramaic, Latin and Greek. 21The chief priests of the Jews protested to Pilate, "Do not write 'The King of the Jews,' but that this man claimed to be king of the Jews." 22Pilate answered, "What I have written, I have written." 23When the soldiers crucified Jesus, they took his clothes, dividing them into four shares, one for each of them, with the undergarment remaining. This garment was seamless, woven in one piece from top to bottom. 24"Let's not tear it," they said to one another. "Let's decide by lot who will get it." This happened that the scripture might be fulfilled which said, "They divided my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing."[1] So this is what the soldiers did. 25Near the cross of Jesus stood his mother, his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. 26When Jesus saw his mother there, and the disciple whom he loved standing nearby, he said to his mother, "Dear woman, here is your son," 27and to the disciple, "Here is your mother." From that time on, this disciple took her into his home. The Death of Jesus 28Later, knowing that all was now completed, and so that the Scripture would be fulfilled, Jesus said, "I am thirsty." 29A jar of wine vinegar was there, so they soaked a sponge in it, put the sponge on a stalk of the hyssop plant, and lifted it to Jesus' lips. 30When he had received the drink, Jesus said, "It is finished." With that, he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. 31Now it was the day of Preparation, and the next day was to be a special Sabbath. Because the Jews did not want the bodies left on the crosses during the Sabbath, they asked Pilate to have the legs broken and the bodies taken down. 32The soldiers therefore came and broke the legs of the first man who had been crucified with Jesus, and then those of the other. 33But when they came to Jesus and found that he was already dead, they did not break his legs. 34Instead, one of the soldiers pierced Jesus' side with a spear, bringing a sudden flow of blood and water. 35The man who saw it has given testimony, and his testimony is true. He knows that he tells the truth, and he testifies so that you also may believe. 36These things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled: "Not one of his bones will be broken,"[2] 37and, as another scripture says, "They will look on the one they have pierced."[3] The Burial of Jesus 38Later, Joseph of Arimathea asked Pilate for the body of Jesus. Now Joseph was a disciple of Jesus, but secretly because he feared the Jews. With Pilate's permission, he came and took the body away. 39He was accompanied by Nicodemus, the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night. Nicodemus brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about seventy-five pounds.[4] 40Taking Jesus' body, the two of them wrapped it, with the spices, in strips of linen. This was in accordance with Jewish burial customs. 41At the place where Jesus was crucified, there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb, in which no one had ever been laid. 42Because it was the Jewish day of Preparation and since the tomb was nearby, they laid Jesus there. … Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

JSFeb 25, 2004

How on earth this story got to be made into a film I will never know. The central character "Jesus" claims he is the "Son of God" and forms a cult with his followers named ?disciples'. Except that in this cult, all the members are How on earth this story got to be made into a film I will never know. The central character "Jesus" claims he is the "Son of God" and forms a cult with his followers named ?disciples'. Except that in this cult, all the members are already poor and the leader is the only one who dies. It's almost as if someone made a parody of modern cultism where the founder is made out as a victim instead. I would not be surprised if production was funded by The Way or the Cooneyites or Christian Scientists. Seriously, how else could such a preposterous plot make it into production?! There is plenty more in this film that appears to be there merely to insult your intellect rather than form a cohesive story. The mother of Jesus, Mary, is called ?The Virgin Mary?; that?s right, Jesus? BIRTH MOTHER is called VIRGIN Mary! Anyway, for some incomprehensible reason the powers that be in this ?Roman Empire? ? bizarre looking people with long beards and hats - decide that Jesus has to die for saying he is the son of God (no reason why I might add). Quite clearly this film portrays a time before any real understanding of mental illness and it is here if anywhere, that the film needed to be explored further. In modern times, such a person would be met not with a barbed cat-o-nine tails, but with compassion, understanding, lithium and electro-convulsive therapy. He would be assessed as to the likelihood of his being a danger to either himself or others and if need be housed in an appropriate facility for the remainder of his life. That the film-makers decided to subject the protagonist to a series of most horrific tortures before nailing him to a crucifix to die shows just how intolerant of the mentally ill the world of this time was. Even until the end, the mutilated Jesus maintains his delusions claiming that he will be reborn after his death. What I found most disturbing about this film is that the afore-mention Mary and another character called Mary (oh come on ? couldn?t the script writers have come up with a different name?!? Gertrude for instance ? there; it only took me two seconds to think that up?) along with the Disciples appear to completely believe what Jesus is saying, even when he is half-dead and evidently suffering from extreme blood loss. Film is the domain of realism ? even fantasy films must remain rooted within some confines of realism, but to expect the film-going audience to accept that these people willingly believe the words of this Jesus character stretches the realms of probability too far. But then maybe that is point? Perhaps what this film is trying to say is that even the most incredible and far-fetched ideas have a home within the minds of the impressionable? As Hitler said, ?the bigger the lie, the more people will believe it?. Or maybe what it is trying to say is that we should look back at our own history of hatred and persecution of those that are different from us or we deem not suitable for our society and learn the lessons from our past to resolve to be even more tolerant and understand of people like Jesus rather than treat them with hatred and fear? Or perhaps the person that made this film had his own agenda and a cynic such as myself could never even hope to comprehend the meaning of this film even if he sat me down and explained it to me. If I don?t understand this film, then perhaps it was not meant for me in the first place? It could be that he made this film purely for himself and people like him and that just because I didn?t understand a single part of it doesn?t mean I should get angry with him. Well, whatever; I still think it would have been better if Jesus had a pair of nunchucks, some throwing stars and an enchanted samurai sword.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

RickFeb 25, 2004

I was one of the fortunate people to actually see this movie, and this has to be the most powerful movie i have ever seen(or has ever been made), its like I stopped breathing 20 minutes to the end. The movie takes you from such subtleness to I was one of the fortunate people to actually see this movie, and this has to be the most powerful movie i have ever seen(or has ever been made), its like I stopped breathing 20 minutes to the end. The movie takes you from such subtleness to engaging scenes, which is to me so beautifully done and extremely powerful. Roger Ebert was dead on in his review, giving this movie 100. I was disgusted and appalled that David Edelstein said this movie was snuff... Lets face it, if you're walking into the theater without a ounce of faith or a proper understanding of religion, your gonna come out feeling as though some guy has just been horribly killed(and certain people were responsible) and Mel is to blame for all of this. But if you go as i did, your gonna come out with water in your eyes, can?t swallow or say a word, but will have better a understanding and sorrow for Christ. This film was not intended for you to feel pleased but to give you an experience and a powerful one at that. Other people are gonna moan and complain(you know), and I couldn?t care less, why, cuz Mel did exactly what he was suppose to do, try and make you feel the experience of Christ, being there watching Christ go through all this. Rick Groen called(or ask) this movie a ?definition of pornography?. Ok lets see, is Kill Bill pornography, is City of God pornography, Why doesn?t someone fire this guy. Why are ignorant people going to this movie, i could prob name 25 films that are more violent than this film, but yet people are condemning it. There have been countless movies portraying different races unfairly, example: Lost In Translation, a widely regarded comedy, but yet japan isn?t full of boring, bumbling, fools, as portrayed in the movie. Ok then the Romans and Jews didn?t kill Christ, ok, now everyone is happy right?. So who killed Christ? Hindus, Christians?. Yea lets change the old(and new) testament and say the Jews had absolutely nothing to do with Christ or his crucifixion. The bloodshed was for a purpose, after watching The Passion, that purpose is up to you. Ignorant people should not go and see this movie, if you go with an Open Mind you will appreciate and Love this film. I felt know one was portrayed evil or unfairly in this film, the only person that matters in this film is Christ , people should look at this movie as what he endured rather than who did it to him.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

10

RoyT.Feb 24, 2004

Powerful

0 of 1 users found this helpful

The Passion of the Christ

User Reviews