Film Review #3 - The Passion of The Christ

You know it's been a really long time since my last post.  I'll tell you a secret as to why that is.  I know how to time travel.  I know how to make time disappear and for weeks to go by without even noticing.  It really is a gift!

This post was originally written on March 27th, 2014

Tonight, Noah will be released in theaters across the nation.  In fact, early showings are already taking place as of 7pm.  Oh for the day when a midnight showing actually meant midnight.  In either case, this movie is surely going to cause a significant amount of conversation and discussion both among film critics and evangelical Christians.  I can remember when another movie caused a similar reaction in 2004.  Mel Gibson's The Passion of The Christ caused much of Hollywood to rethink their assumptions about the purchasing power of Christians.  Let's face it to Hollywood there's only one religion, money.  In that sense, Mel Gibson risked a great deal having personally financed most of the film with his own fortune.  It's important to understand these background details because films aren't made in a vacuum.

Now, the movie itself is first and foremost a movie.  This fact is inescapable even for Mr. Gibson.  At the end of the day, source material will never be at the center of a movie.  Unless of course you have a Liam Neeson and Morgan Freeman.  I think people may just come to hear them read Matthew's Gospel word for word, that is possible.

The visual effects and realism are stunning, sometimes more so than what is really necessary.  It is true for example that the film is in the language of what is likely to have been the language that much of the events transpired in.  However, what does that actually offer or benefit the viewer?  Does it add to the desired impact that Mr. Gibson intended?  I'm not so sure.

Additionally with a level of violence and brutality that Quentin Tarantino would be proud of, the movie has the potential of exposing younger viewers to a level of violence that is unnecessary given the intended audience.

All and all, what purpose does creating and producing the most accurate depiction of the world's most controversial death have?  To lead others to Christ?  There are better ways.  To give a Christian audience a visual reference to the suffering of their savior?  The profoundness of salvation and atonement can't be captured on film.  I would argue that as with most other movies, the reason someone makes a film is to either tell a story or to make money.  In this case, it may be a mixture of both because surely there are methods of film making which serve to express the story itself, in deeper all be it less vivid, expressions.  However, if even one person came to faith in Christ because of Mr. Gibson's movie then wouldn't God say it was more than worth all the controversy and money?  Something to think about.

Up next:  Noah!