The hype surrounding “The Passion of Christ” convinced me to go see the new Mel Gibson movie based on the last twelve hours of Christ’s life. I found this rendition to be not only disturbing, but extremely disappointing. While its director Mel Gibson claimed to be on a religious mission, it seemed to me that he sensationalized and used the shock factor to woo the masses, just like any other blockbuster film. I understand the argument that the violence of the film was intended to show the suffering Jesus of Nazareth endured, but the blood distracted me from the story.
The flesh being ripped from his back and his exposed ribs made me wonder more about the special effects then the religious meaning. This was a film that depended on make-up artists, special effect technicians and an amazing editing crew. Much like the Bible, “The Passion” is not to be taken literally. Stories of the movie causing faith-induced heart attacks and religious awakenings seem as sensational to me as the movie itself.
In my opinion only religious fanatics would be able to interpret a $9 film as a factual rendition of the last 12 hours of Jesus. Who knows what happened 2,000 years ago? While the use of Aramaic, Latin and Hebrew created a sense of authenticity, the reality is that these scenes had multiple takes and sound editing created the sharp snapping of the whip. The movie avoided telling the story of a man named Jesus who spoke of loving thy neighbor; instead it left the viewer with the faceless image of blood.
Leave a Reply