|
|
The Passion of the Christ (2004)
This gaudy, unsubtle rendition of the final hours in the life of one Jesus Christ would have been more aptly titled "The Passion of Mel Gibson", as the talented actor turned director tries to make a showcase for his religious beliefs. The problem with The Passion of the Christ, however, is mainly its total unnecessity. Gibson's portrait contains nothing new. In fact, it's hardly even a portrait, but more of a collection of scenes which all contain more or less the same dramatic and thematic components. There is rarely made an effort to try to understand motivations and reasons why things happen as they do. And what is more astonishing; Gibson makes most characters (with the clear exception of Pontius Pilate) into stereotypes. The Passion of the Christ is a burly, flashy and highly exaggerated movie, but what is worse: it has close to no dramatic value or progression whatsoever. There is no development, because what Gibson portrays here is a static period. If he wants to show Jesus' passion, then he should have included material where the prophet did more than brace himself for death. And if he wants to show suffering in the name of Christianity, he needn't look to Jesus, because history is full of examples. Instead he lets his version of this highly particular biblical story (a historical anecdote really) become some kind of foundation for his (and others) religion, when what it really portrays - in all its hyperbole - is merely an interesting political situation 2,000 years ago, and how the idea of capital punishment was executed at the time.
|