"Where Movie Critics Get A Taste Of Their Own Medicine"
Subscribe To Weekly Newsletter!
|
|
 |
Is Mel's "Passion" worthy of a prequel?
March 4, 2004 |
Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" is being praised and crucified by film critics and has already brought in 125 million in box office sales in its first five days. This popular film may be receiving mixed reviews, but I think Gibson's movie is brilliant and I hope he will consider making a prequel.
"The Passion of the Christ" is a movie directed by Mel Gibson and graphically depicts the last 12 hours of Jesus' life. The trial and bloody beatings ultimately lead Jesus (James Caviezel) to Jerusalem's Golgotha where he faces the Crucifixion. Mel's version of this treacherous day is extremely violent and some critics think he went too far - even accusing him of anti-Semitism.
Jami Bernard (New York Daily News) calls Gibson's movie "a brutal, nasty film that demonizes Jews" and said, "Mel Gibson's 'The Passion of the Christ' is the most virulently anti-Semitic movie made since the German propaganda films of the World War II."
Ok, folks. Grab your favorite beverage and snack before you start reading my column. This is gonna be a long one.
Mel's movie depicts both Jews and Romans as they are described in the Bible. So what's the problem? I think I better prescribe Jami a big dose of Ebert & Roeper. Overall, they provided the best reviews on this film:
Roger Ebert (Chicago Sun-Times) said in his review, "My own feeling is that Gibson's film is not anti-Semitic, but reflects a range of behavior on the part of its Jewish characters, on balance favorably. The Jews who seem to desire Jesus' death are in the priesthood, and have political as well as theological reasons for acting…The other Jews seen in the film are viewed positively; Simon helps Jesus to carry the cross, Veronica brings a cloth to wipe his face, Jews in the crowd cry out against his torture."
Richard Roeper (Chicago Sun-Times) said in his column, "Mel Gibson's 'The Passion of the Christ' is not an anti-Semitic film…we must keep in mind that Jews and Romans alike were simply fulfilling their roles in God's plan for Jesus, who was put on this Earth to die. The Jews didn't kill Christ; humankind did."
And what a bloody, horrible death it was and it has some film critics in an uproar. Jami Bernard said, "The movie is a compendium of tortures that would horrify the regulars at an S & M club." Jonathan Rosenbaum (Chicago Reader) adds, "If I were a Christian, I'd be appalled to have this primitive and pornographic bloodbath presume to speak for me."
Rosenbaum would be in the minority based on what I've witnessed at my screening. People cried - literally sobbing in the theater. The fact is Jesus died a brutal death. He was beaten and scourged and now we finally get a glimpse of how much suffering he endured. Yet critics have gone even one step further claiming Mel is obsessed with violence.
Jonathan Foreman (New York Post) said on Scarborough Country (MSNBC) that Mel Gibson is obsessed with violence and torture - pointing to other violent films Gibson appeared in such as "Braveheart" and "Leathal Weapon." Foreman said, "There seemed to be too much emphasis on the suffering and the cruelty and not enough on Christ's message."
David Denby (The New Yorker) calls this movie a "sickening death trap" and said, "Then comes the Crucifixion itself, dramatized with a curious fixation on the technical details-an arm pulled out of its socket, huge nails hammered into hands, with Caviezel jumping after each whack. At that point, I said to myself, 'Mel Gibson has lost it'…his obsession with pain, disguised by religious feelings, has now reached a frightening apotheosis." Denby also added that Gibson "falls in danger of altering Jesus' message of love into one of hate."
C'mon, Denby! Let's get real here. The Jesus flashbacks each contained a message of love. Jesus himself never fought back at the Romans or Jews who held him captive or beat him physically. He even healed a Roman soldier's ear after one of his disciples cut it off. Oh, and let's not forget the image of Jesus - with his feet and hands nailed to a wooden cross and body dripping blood and flesh - offering a prayer for his accusers, "Father, forgive them for they no not what they do." No love? I don't buy it, Denby.
I agree. This event was very violent and Bible prophecy even foretold of the Messiah's physical abuse in Isaiah 52:14 (NIV): "…his appearance was so disfigured beyond that of any man and his form marred beyond human likeness." Other critics got it right:
Mel Gibson was recently interviewed by Diane Sawyer (ABC News) and Sawyer showed him a clip of John Dominic Crossman (a bible scholar) who saw the movie and said, "I think I'm a Martian! I'm just watching this film. All the time I keep saying to myself - what's anyone got against this guy?" Gibson replied back jokingly, "Yeah. You're right - if you were a Martian."
Is all this violence drowning out the importance of Jesus' death by not delving deeper into Gospels? A few film critics think so:
In my opinion, most people already know the story. This is not Mars. This is America! "One Nation Under God" for crying out loud. The Bible is the #1 read book in the world and the Gospels have been told over and over in churches, movies and other forms of media. Mel's version of "The Passion" finally offers the cinema something unique - and daring considering the movie is spoken in Aramaic and Latin using subtitles.
Holly McClure (hollymcclure.com) is a film critic who also served as a Producer for a "Behind the Scenes" documentary on Gibson's film. She explains Gibson's goal with this movie: "He began a quest to tell his version by avoiding the entire story of Christ's life (as many of the old Bible epics have already done) and instead rendered a firsthand glimpse at the trial and crucifixion of Jesus Christ, beginning in the garden of Gethsemane and ending with his resurrection in the tomb. This is more of an emotional journey than anything else. An experience designed to make you feel as though you're a witness to Christ's remaining hours on earth, when history was forever changed by His story."
My favorite movie on the Gospel of Jesus is thus far Franco Zeffirelli's "Jesus of Nazareth" (1977). The movie's trial and crucifixion scenes are good, but nothing compared to Gibson's "Passion." Robert Powell played Jesus and I thought he was the only actor capable of perfecting the role until I saw James Caviezel's Oscar-worthy portrayal. His is equally good, if not more powerful. Most critics (negative & positive) acknowledge Caviezel's awesome performance.
Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ" is the most powerful, most revealing take on Christ's sacrifice I have ever seen devoted to film. Indeed Gibson has sustained hard hitting attacks from the media and various Jewish groups, but he has also received a myriad of support from people from all walks of life. His version of the "The Passion" is a triumph for both the cinema and the story of Jesus' death.
I want to thank Mel Gibson for directing a movie that has opened my eyes to the reality of Christ's sacrifice - showing what Jesus must have gone through in his final hours on earth. You see, I believe Jesus is my Lord and Savior. I'm not perfect and I sin like everyone else. But I try. I may not be any better than the next guy, but I do have this hope of salvation and it begins at the cross where I know Jesus died for my sins: "But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed." Isaiah 53:5 (NIV). "The Passion of the Christ" has given new meaning to the words "pierced," "crushed," "punishment" and "wounds."
Gibson has clearly assembled the perfect cast and crew for this work of art. Besides Caviezel, other excellent performances are turned in by Maia Morgenstern as Mary (Jesus' mother), Monica Bellucci (Mary Magdalene), Hristo Shopov (Pontius Pilot), and Mattia Sbragia (Caiaphas). I especially thought Rosalinda Celentano's depiction of Satan was artistically brilliant. The movie was filmed beautifully thanks to Caleb Deschanel's amazing cinematography.
Now that Mel Gibson has the attention of moviegoers, I believe it would be a sin (loosely speaking, of course) not to make a prequel to "The Passion of the Christ." When I watched the Jesus flashbacks, I wanted to see more. Not because this movie needed it, but because Caviezel's portrayal of Jesus is powerful, intriguing and heartfelt. Call it gluttony, but I want more! Gibson has all the ingredients and the means necessary to do it. I hope his passion does not stop here. I'm not alone in my opinion:
No matter what critics or audiences say about this movie, I believe God has given Mel Gibson a great artistic gift - and purpose in life.
Richard Roeper summed the movie up best on "Ebert & Roeper" (Buena Vista TV): "This is the most powerful, important and by far the most graphic interpretation of Christ's final hours ever put on film. Mel Gibson is a masterful story-teller and he has created a 2000 year-old world brimming with authentic detail…it is an epic great film."
"The Passion of the Christ" inspires Jews, Christians, non-believers and people of other faiths to discuss the story of Jesus and the events surrounding his death. It can be a learning experience for us all.
Martians still have hope!
-- CRITIC DOCTOR
|
|
Jesus, the Christ: James Caviezel
Mary: Maia Morgenstern
Mary Magdalene: Monica Bellucci
Pontius Pilate: Hristo Shopov
Caiaphas: Mattia Sbragia
Judas: Luca Lionello
Claudia: Claudia Gerini
Gesmas: Francesco Cabras
Satan: Rosalinda Celentano
Newmarket Films presents a film directed by Mel Gibson. Written by Gibson and Benedict Fitzgerald. Running time: 126 minutes. Rated R (for sequences of graphic violence).
