film review by Wayne Clarke

The film “The Passion of the Christ” is moving and disturbing in equal measures. It stirs the soul and brings the central events of God’s plan of salvation to the screen more graphically than has ever been done before.

Hollywood star Mel Gibson has produced and directed a film which will shock some people with its explicit depiction of the scourging and crucifixion of Christ, and it has rightly been given an 18 certificate for its “sustained violence”. I’m not used to watching violent films but for me the images of the violence inflicted on Jesus were less disturbing than films which portray mindless and random killing. At least in this film the blood has a purpose, in fact our faith is based upon the power of the blood of Jesus. The mercy of God among such inhumanity so explicitly displayed is the source of our life and hope.

The mood of the film is dark and Gothic. It begins in the gloom of Gethsemane, where the devil appears to Jesus in human form, questioning his prayers to his father. The devil then takes the form of a snake which Jesus crushes under his heel, fulfilling the promise to Adam and Eve in Genesis chapter 3. This scene sets the mood for the whole film – deep disturbing scenes, mainly following the Gospel accounts but adding extra imagery and detail.

The film has been charged with anti-Semitism, but I don’t think this is justified. It is certainly anti-establishment, and rightly so, but there is no reason to suppose that the religious leaders represent the whole Jewish people. The religious authorities led by Caiaphas are menacing and brutal and go to all lengths to get Jesus killed. But other ordinary people like Mary and John and Mary Magdalen demonstrate the sympathetic side of the Jews, and after all Jesus was a Jew as well.

Some of the minor characters are surprising. Simon of Cyrene, who carries Jesus’ cross when he stumbles, becomes a more important figure than he is in the gospels. This is accentuated by the time the film gives to the journey of Jesus and his cross to the place of crucifixion. In this Gibson as director gives away his Catholic roots, following rather laboriously the traditional stations of the cross. Judas also gets more scenes than he does in the gospels, including one gruesome episode when, full of guilt, a group of children appear to him to turn into demons who hound him to his suicide.

The dialogue in the film is not in English but in the authentic languages of the time: the Jews speak Aramaic, and the Romans speak Latin. Much, but not all, of the dialogue has English subtitles. The authenticity of the language added a layer of realism that surprised me – not a gimmick but an essential element in the recounting of history.

For me the most serious weakness of the film is its lack of context. The story begins at Gethsemane with only a few brief flashbacks to tell us anything of Jesus’ earlier life. So when the Jewish council accuses Jesus of blasphemy and sedition, the film gives us no evidence to decide whether the accusations are true or not. And because we don’t see the ministry of Jesus we know nothing in the film of his healing, his story-telling and his virtuous life.

On the other hand, at the one point where a context for the crucifixion is evident, the film is at its strongest. As Jesus is nailed to the cross, we see flashbacks to the Last Supper – Jesus teaching his disciples the meaning of his death, his blood poured out as an offering for the world. In this moment his brutal death is explained, a death not forced upon him but willingly embraced as an act of love and redemption.