Posted on 03/04/2004 6:25:40 PM PST by Viva Christo Rey
A REVIEW OF THE FILM, THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST
by Most Rev. Donald J. Sanborn
Overall rating: EXCELLENT. This film is nothing short of going and witnessing with one's own eyes the passion and death of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
General handling of the subject. I went to the movie with great skepticism, fearing that I would be sorely disappointed by the treatment of Christ and the Blessed Virgin Mary. Christ is true God and true man, but the person Christ is the divine Person, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Nearly always films humanize Christ too much. The dominant characteristic of Christ is His divinity, and not His humanity.
In this film, however, the preservation of the dominance of divinity in Christ's character was very well portrayed. It is a very, very difficult thing to do, practically impossible. To portray Christ as He really was, it is necessary to combine the authority and dignity of His divinity together with the extreme humility, innocence, and kindness of His humanity. Mr. Gibson has combined these two things in this film, at least as far as is humanly possible. It is a great achievement.
The actors. James Caviezel, the actor who plays Christ, does an incredibly superb job during the entire film, whether it is in the scenes of the passion itself, or in the flashbacks to Our Lord's public life. In my opinion, the accurate portrayal of Christ in the flashback was more difficult than the portrayal of Him in the passion, since in the passion, Our Lord's humanity is most evident. In His public life, however, Our Lord's divinity is more evident. Mr. Caviezel makes an absolutely believable Christ, and one quickly loses the idea that one is watching a movie. The viewer is transported to the scene as if an eyewitness.
Maia Morgenstern plays a very convincing Virgin Mary, but greater praise must be paid to the director, who understood that Our Lady was not merely a wailing woman on the side of the way of the Cross, as she is so often portrayed, but instead a true associate of Our Lord in His passion and death. Only a Catholic would have known to portray her in such a way. Our Lady is not some emotional wreck that cannot bare to see her Son suffer, and who needs to be carried off after she meets Him. Instead, she is with Him from the beginning watching every move that is made, feeling every scourge, receiving every blow. This is her compassion, her passion with Our Lord's. St. Bernard commented that her love for Our Lord was so strong that she permitted no suffering to attain Him which did not go first through her own heart. The film portrays this reality perfectly.
While Our Lady is certainly sorrowful throughout, she retains composure; and sees it through to the end. Theologically and historically speaking, this is absolutely correct.
The actor who plays St. John also does a wonderful and convincing job. Again, however, it is the director who gets the credit. Instead of being the effeminate weakling, as he is portrayed in nearly all films about Christ, St. John is a dignified, strong, and innocent-looking young man who intensely follows Our Lord in everything that happens to Him, seeming to understand perfectly the sacred mission which the passion represents.
The actress who plays St. Mary Magdalene is all right, although not as convincing as the others, in my opinion.
The actor who plays Pontius Pilate was also great in his part, being able to speak very effectively by expressions on his face. In most cases he has no need to say anything, since you know what he is thinking. His tortured conscience about the condemnation of Christ is very well presented.
The members of the Sanhedrin, especially Caiphas, were very well played.
Accuracy. The film is, on the whole, very accurate and very faithful to the gospel, even in some minute details:
a.. The arrest in the garden is very realistic, especially the cutting off of the ear of Malchus, and Our Lord's healing of it.
b.. The trial by the Sanhedrin is exactly as the gospel narrates it.
c.. St. Peter's denial is done superbly.
d.. The scourging at the pillar is so realistic and done so perfectly; according all of the details of both the gospels and commentators, that you feel every scourge that they place on Our Lord's back and chest.
e.. Our Lord's willingness to undergo the passion and to carry the Cross is visible in many little details throughout the whole film.
f.. The meeting with Our Lady is one of the high points of the film. It is deeply, deeply heart-rending. During the meeting, He explains to her the reason for His passion: "Behold, I make all things new." Although this is not recorded in the gospel, it is quite believable that He said this or something like it to her.
g.. The three falls of Our Lord are vividly portrayed, as well as a very believable rendition of making Simon of Cyrene carry the Cross, and of the wiping of Christ's face by Veronica.
h.. The scene on the hill of Calvary, the fixing of Christ to the Cross, and the raising of the Cross are lifelike, sorrowful, and powerful.
i.. The seven last words are very well done, especially the giving of Our Lady to St. John.
j.. The darkening of the sky and the earthquake are very accurate and vividly enacted.
Inaccuracy. There are a few inaccuracies in the film, which the movie-goer should be aware of:
a.. He shows Christ being tempted by the devil in the agony of the garden. This is not mentioned in the gospel, but it is not impossible either.
b.. The greatest inaccuracy is the flashback to Our Lord's life in Nazareth, where He is portrayed as a young man who (a) does not answer His mother when she calls; (b) is working on a table which is made improperly; (c) playfully splashes water in Our Lady's face as He is washing His hands. It is impossible that any of these things be true. The scene detracts from the film, and should be removed altogether.
c.. St. Mary Magdalene is portrayed as the woman caught in adultery whom Our Lord saved from stoning. This is not true. She was the woman who washed Our Lord's feet in the house of the Pharisee, and was the brother of Lazarus, whom Our Lord raised from the dead.
d.. Some of the translations on the screen were poor or inaccurate. The Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, is called "The Helper," which is a poor translation. Our Lord says that the Holy Ghost is "from the Father." This is seriously inaccurate. The true translation is that He proceeds from the Father. This is a very important distinction. Furthermore, Christ in the film fails to respond to Pilate, "Thou hast said it," when asked if He were a king. This response is a Hebrew expression which is a very emphatic yes. There are other cases in which I thought the translations were lacking. To the film's credit, however, the words of consecration of the wine do not say for all, which is Novus Ordo, but for many, which it the traditional translation. On the other hand, at the film's Last Supper, the text should have been, "This is the chalice of My Blood which (chalice) poured out." Instead we read in the subtitle that the Blood is given, which is not accurate.
Omissions. Surprisingly and sadly, there are a few omissions:
a.. The soldiers in the garden falling back when Our Lord identifies Himself. This event recorded in the gospel is a clear indication of Our Lord's divinity.
b.. The incident of Pilate's insistence to the Pharisees concerning the INRI: "What I have written, I have written."
c.. The statement by the Jews, "Let His blood be upon us and upon our children."
d.. The solemn splitting of the Temple curtain. It is seen very briefly, and it is a result of the earthquake, but it did not happen in such a perfunctory or accidental manner, but in a miraculous way.
e.. The declaration by Longinus, "Truly this man is the Son of God. "
Conclusion. Despite these inaccuracies and omissions, the film is a splendid, first-rate, genuine, and deeply moving rendition of the passion and death of Our Lord Jesus Christ. I recommend it to all. Go and see it not once, but many times.
Although I believe that Mr. Gibson needs to publicly repudiate many bad films from years past, he has done us a great service by bringing to our eyes the passion and death of Our Lord Jesus Christ. He deserves thanks for this great and courageous project, and especially for bringing it to term over the objections of the modern-day Sanhedrin.
Maia Morgenstern plays a very convincing Virgin Mary, but greater praise must be paid to the director, who understood that Our Lady was not merely a wailing woman on the side of the way of the Cross, as she is so often portrayed, but instead a true associate of Our Lord in His passion and death. Only a Catholic would have known to portray her in such a way.
Catholic Ping - let me know if you want on/off this list
Vidi aquam egredientem de templo a latare dextro,
alleluia:
et omnes ad quos pervenit aqua ista salvi facti sunt et dicent:
alleluia, alleluia.
Ps. Confitemini Domino, quoniam bonus: quoniam in saeculum misericordia eius.
V. Gloria Patri, et Filio, et Spiritui Sancto. Sicut erat in principio et nunc et semper et in saecula saeculorum.
Amen.
I saw water flowing from the temple at the right side,
alleluia
And all to whom that water came were saved, and they shall say:
alleluia
Confitemini Domino
Gloria Patri
Amen.
No, no! Psalm 25.6 from the Lavabo! "I shall wash my hands among the innocent."
I also liked Christ quoting Psalm 115.16 (I think at the beginning of the via crucis) "O Lord, for I am thy servant: I am thy servant, and the son of thy handmaid" in a Marian way. Read the whole Psalm for context.
Oh, yes, you must! In fact, plan on seeing it twice. As one reviewer noted last week, the first time you will find yourself comparing your reactions to what you have read posted by others. The 2nd time is for yourself.
My teenage daughter and I saw it last Friday. We both plan to see it again on Good Friday. The matinee showing was not too crowded. For the remainder of that day, I had images from the movie flashing across my mind. Lent is the perfect season to view this film. Please share your reaction with me, once you have seen it.
The movie absolutely shattered my mental image of the Passion. And I have a much better understanding of Mary.
My husband, who went with me, was also deeply touched (especially by Mary). He is an atheist (for now). When he told me of how deeply he was touched by Our Lady, I said "to Jesus, through Mary".
Wow! I'll pray for him. You know, the other day I was talking about the film with my priest. He had a very favorable impression, but said that he didn't think it would bring non-Christians to the faith. How can a priest say something like that? A caller to EWTN tonight mentioned a Moslem who had converted as a result of the movie. This movie is going to turn the Mohammedan world on its head if it's shown there.
Great insights! This was my least favorite scene, but now I'm beginning to "get it." This film is so rich.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.