[Rutles4Ever]

A sampling of "professional" reviews is a bit perplexing:

Ebert and Roeper enthusiastically liked this film. Each acknowledged the violence but sincerely saw beyond that.

All the other reviews seem to be fixated with the violence, and are rating it anywhere from one to three stars because of the violence and their incredible assertion that there is little or no story. What story is more recognizable and well known that the story of the crucifixion?

Meanwhile, Lord of the Rings and Braveheart were both tremendously violent, yet the same reviewers were slobbering over themselves (rightfully) trumping Braveheart's 'authentic' battle scenes and LOTR's 'intensity'.

The media just does not get it. Aside from Ebert and Roeper, the film critics' circle seems to be wringing its hands over a story that failed to reach them on any level deeper than a Tomb Raider sequel. How incredible a discrepancy is it where routine stories of weeping general audience members can be contrasted with a bunch of professional filmgoers who are suddenly disturbed by blood and gore?

I've said it a million times: Hollywood will not allow this film to win any critical acclaim or industy accolades. It is venomously anti-Christian (especially anti-Catholic) and it will remain that way...

[Liz]

Movie Review: Mel Gibson`s Passion
SeaMax News | 2/24/2004 | Fr. Michael Reilly


If art conveys beauty, truth, and powerful emotions, then Mel Gibson is the Michelangelo of the twenty-first century.

Gibson and his crew used powerful imagery, artistic imagination, and expert cinematography to accurately portray the sufferings of Jesus as recounted in the Gospels and in tradition.

"It is as it was," in the words of Pope John Paul II. The movie opens with Jesus in the Garden of Gethsamane and concludes with his resurrection.

Some pointed features:

• To emphasize the centrality of Jesus' passion, the rest of Jesus' life is recounted only in flashbacks. For example, as Jesus is forgiving the Roman soldiers who brutalized him, there is a flashback to Jesus teaching about love of enemies.

• As the Stations of the Cross reflect Jesus' suffering through the eyes of Mary, Gibson shows us Mary's reaction to everything that happens to Jesus. After Jesus, Mary is the most important person in the film.

• Gibson shows the devil moving behind the scenes to engineer the death of the Messiah, only to be duped into engineering his own defeat.

• Unique details from each of the four gospels are used as well as unique details from the Stations of the Cross, such as Jesus meeting his mother, Veronica wiping his face with her veil, and his several falls while carrying the cross. This allows for a very rich portrait of the Passion that can touch many people.

Who is guilty of the crime of killing Christ? Everyone. The devil orchestrates it. Judas betrays him. Peter denies him. The leaders of the Jews hand him over. Pilate orders it and the Roman soldiers carry it out with fierce brutality. But Gibson emphasizes that the guilt extends beyond the characters in the movie to each of us as we kill Christ with our sins. Mel actually holds the nail which pierces Jesus’ hand.

Will this film inspire ant-Semitism? I can't see how. The film evokes deep and powerful emotions, but anger and hatred are not among them. No one who watches this film could be moved to hatred of anyone, but rather the viewer is moved to practice Jesus’ message of love.

Are the Jewish leaders the villains? Caiphas the High Priest and his cohorts are villains, but Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea defend Jesus at his trial. Gibson also embellishes the role of Simon of Cyrene, a Jew who helps Jesus carry the cross and is visibly moved by Jesus’ suffering.

In point of fact, the sheer brutality and sadism of the Roman soldiers is far more striking than the role of the Jewish leaders.

In short, Mel Gibson has given us a very moving and powerful image of Jesus’ crucifixion and death, a portrait that will make a deep and lasting impression for generations to come.

[nutmeg]

Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times gave The Passion of the Christ 4 Stars (out of 4 Stars).

On their weekly film critique show last week, both Ebert and Roeper gave the film "two thumbs way up". Both stated they did not feel the movie was anti-Semitic.

From ChristianityToday.com: The Passion and Prejudice - Why I asked the Anti-Defamation League to give Mel Gibson a break - by Michael Medved, 02/24/04

Also check this site out: SeeThePassion.com - An independent website (and petition) supporting the movie, "The Passion".

Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times gave The Passion of the Christ 4 Stars (out of 4 Stars).

On their weekly film critique show last week, both Ebert and Roeper gave the film "two thumbs way up". Both stated they did not feel the movie was anti-Semitic.

[ought-six]

Hollywood is indeed venomously anti-Christian, and especially anti-Catholic. You can count the Catholics in Hollywood on one hand, and even they are reluctant to practice their faith.

[NordP]

We saw one of E & R --don't know which is which--but the younger one, on Hannity & Colmes, and he said the phrase, "no gratuitous violence."

My husband turned to me and said, "That's EXACTLY what I was waiting to hear someone say."

[sweet_diane]

"I've said it a million times: Hollywood will not allow this film to win any critical acclaim or industy accolades."

I don't usually watch award shows but did happen to surf by the People's Choice awards, I guess it's been a couple of months ago now. Mel Gibson won for best male actor in a movie...yet he hadn't put out a movie during the year! He seemed very emotional while receiving the award.