|
Review by Harvey Karten
3½ stars out of 4
The wonderful critic David Thomson says in his "New
Biographical Dictionary of Film" that Mel Gibson has "an
irreverent sense of humor." With "The Passion of The Christ,"
Gibson seems to be responding as though to show his other
side. The most publicized and controversial movie in
years, "Passion" could have been narrated by Gibson at the
very beginning where, with his "irreverent sense of humor," he'd
say, "So you have arthritis so painful that can't walk? You've
tried Viagra and Levitra and Cialis but you're still a wet noodle?
You're in such agony from last night's boozing that you've sworn
off the sauce? Now quit complaining. You want pain? I'll show
you so much agony that you'll throw away your pills and rejoice
in your good fortune."
The rugged Max Rockatansky (top cop Gibson goes on a
high-speed revenge binch after the murder of his wife and
child); the romantic hero of "Gallipoli" (youthful idealist meets a
sad fate in World War I); the reckless con in "Mrs. Soffel" (the
wife of the prison warden falls in love with the imprisoned
Gibson); the roustabout in "Braveheart" (Gibson builds a
grass-roots rebellion against the tyrannical King Edward I), and
the role which gave him the most fame in the "Lethal Weapon"
series (undercover cop as borderline psychotic) all have served
to give Mel Gibson the feel for the rough and tumble of life in
remote corners of the Roman Empire.
As depicted in Gibson's epic tale one which follows the
classical unities of time (12 hours), place (Jerusalem and
outskirts), and action (a single plot) "The Passion of The Christ"
is epic in scope, a stunning bit of film-making which breaks from
all previous renditions of the Gospels by concentrating on one of
history's most infamous half-days. Gibson, as conservative a
Christian as one can get without becoming a monk, illuminates
the story of the torments of Jesus with characters who speak
Aramaic (that language spoken by Jews of the time), and Latin
(the all-but-dead tongue spoken by the Roman soldiers and
governor of Roman Palestine). The subtitles are crisp, easy to
read, and one of the director's few surrenders to modernism in
that he originally wanted to eschew that well-established
concession to an English-speaking audience.
The opening scenes are rich with foreboding. Jesus (Jim
Caviezel), aware that God has chosen to use his violent death
to wipe clean the sins of the world, is afraid and lets his
disciples know that martyrdom would not have been his
independent choice. Arrested by the Jewish police, he is
escorted to Jewish high priest Caiaphas (Mattia Sbragia), a man
whose power base is threatened by his prisoner's message of
love, the need for a simple faith without ritual, a message which
is gaining Jewish followers away from the rigid codes of the
Pharisees. Caiaphas who has the ability to manipulate those
who are still not convinced escorts Jesus to the Roman
governor, Pontius Pilate (Hristo Naumov Shopov), who refuses
to punish a man he considers innocent, passes the buck to the
foppish King Herod who passes it right back to Pilate. Pilate,
concerned that a rebellion in his remote region would lead to his
removal from power by Caesar, tries to pacify the mob by
ordering a severe whipping. When Caiaphas demands nothing
short of crucifixion, Pilate, both disgusted with the bloodthirsty
mob and fearful for his own job, turns the prisoner over to the
Roman soldiers for execution.
This segment of the film, which includes the regrets of Judas
Iscariot who had told the high priests the location of Jesus in
return for 30 pieces of silver (which he later throws back at
Caiaphas in an orgy of self-hatred)-- concerns the political
maneuvering that led to Jesus' condemnation. Either oddly or
understandably depending on your taste in stories, critics have
so far relegated the politics to the back-burner concentrating
their attention on the severe punishment that Jesus endured at
the hands of Roman soldiers, who by all rights should have
nothing against the man. The soldiers are depicted as half-wits
and drunkards, just the sorts of people whom we were assured
in the opening scenes of Ridley Scott's "Gladiator" had the
discipline and stoicism to turn back a horde of barbaric
Germanic tribes.
During the remaining hours, the Romans giddy with the
power to torment their prisoner for the pure sadistic joy not only
force Jesus to carry the 300-pound cross (actually 150 pounds
in this production) are seen as almost monolithic in their cruelty
while even Caiaphas, whose fanaticisim results in the this
explosion of violence is shown almost guilt-ridden for what he
has done. Mary (Maia Morgenstein) appears now and then,
both in flashbacks to happier days watching her son carve a
table and as a weeping mother, obviously heartbroken to
witness this orgy of destruction, while Satan (Rosalinda
Celentano), the one metaphoric figure in this otherwise literal
presentation of the Gospels, floats through the crowd, finally
bellowing in disgust during the closing moments of the film
depicting the Resurrection.
Though there's more violence in "Lord of the Rings" and in
any number of Hollywood blockbusters going back even to the
early Warner Brothers' cartoons, an audience can react as does
a teen to a game on his X-box. There's nothing cartoonish
about the lashings, at first by two muscular Romans, first with
canes, then with cats-o'nine-tails. Ultimately not content with
simply crucifying the man, soldiers continued the whippings all
the way to Calvary.
The drama was shot in Rome's famous Cinecitta studios and
in the 2000-year-old Italian town of Matera photographed by
Caleb Deschanel most at nighttime as though to show the light
fighting against the unrelenting darkness. Jim Caviezel, hardly
a household name despite a sensitive performance in
"Frequency" as man communicating with the past in order to
save the life of his father, is not the most charismatic guy
around, but does a creditable job with the Aramaic he is
compelled to use throughout.
As for the charge of anti-Semitism: Gibson has successfully
reenacted what he considers the fundamental truth of the
Gospels: that while many Jews became followers of Jesus (after
all, who made up the audience at the Sermon on the Mount?),
those in power in the semi-autonomous Senate or Sanhedren,
were prepared to resort to the ultimate punishment to stop the
leader of a massive new following. However, what is important
is how the audience will relate to the events shown. If "The
Passion of The Christ" is shown in the Middle East where it is
destined to be screened, some Muslims could easily interpret
the story as proof that "the Jews" are up to no good. In the
Western world, the possibility exists some will likewise see the
story as confirming their own anti-Jewish feelings, while
children, especially teen bullies, could exploit the film to
continue their own sadistic agenda.
If people react irrationally after seeing "The Passion of The
Christ," fault not Mel Gibson. The film is involving despite the
diminishing returns of the floggings, a must-see not simply by
true believers but by people of all faiths, no faiths, and feelings
between.
Copyright © 2004 Harvey Karten
|