UrbanWire

UrbanWire takes a sneak peek and reviews The Passion of the Christ amid the passionate controversy it has stirred.

Cast: James Caviezel, Maia Morgenstern, Monica Bellucci
Director: Mel Gibson

The Passion of the Christ is arguably the most violent film I have seen. It is so nauseatingly graphic and excruciatingly explicit that it seems the nature of the film is suffering (no pun intended) from a senseless and desensitising complex. Yet, it is good.

The necessity of violence is debatable and in fact, self-explanatory in the cleverly titled film. "Passion" in its Latin roots means suffering and to a certain extent, the title, if not the global hype, prepares the audience for what to expect. The violence is a visceral experience as to what the literal bible can't offer and even a catharsis for some, and I meant even for those without a faith.

Forget about comparing Passion to biblical epics like Cecil B. DeMille's The Ten Commandments and William Wyler's Ben Hur or even your Sunday sermon because the film bears no such resemblance.

This must be seen as a film that visualises an important event in the bible and that violence functions as a filmmaking tool by Mel Gibson in his bravest, most provocative, yet honest manner. You'll see Jesus flayed, slashed, whipped and flogged repeatedly by the Roman soldiers to his bare bones, his bloody flesh almost beyond recognition. You'll see Jesus carrying the heavy cross (and falling many times) at the Stations of the Cross, pushed by the laughing soldiers to the ground. You might even leave the theatre, or perhaps entertain the idea.

The film, in Latin and Aramaic, opens like a B-grade horror flick with a haunting score in the dark and cloudy garden of Gethsemane. The camera slowly creeps and lingers on Jesus (James Caviezel) praying fervently. An androgynous Satan (Rosalinda Celentano) slithers as a snake to tempt Jesus and hides behind a hood, with a menacing look. The night is literally and metaphorically evil.

This is contrasted by the golden-brown hues in the glimmering daylight where the imagery of blood is evident in almost every frame of the film (even Quentin Tarantino's Kill Bill would look lame next to it). And as Jesus is tortured and beaten relentlessly and senselessly by the brutal Roman soldiers, Mary (Maia Morgenstern) and Mary Magdalene (Monica Bellucci) could only watch in shock, daze and quiet outrage. This parallels the experience of the audience as we are made weak and helpless watching the injustice unravelling in front of us, and possibly even a non-believer would want to stop the bloody lashing.

It feels as if the audience has sinned even more for being indifferent and powerless. Gibson has clearly manipulated and cast the audience into the roles of hapless lambs. The crafty touch of his exemplifies the power of cinema - it inspires and/or provokes the viewer into awe, admiration and sometimes, revulsion.

The film, or rather Gibson, isn't anti-Semitic although it borders on a distasteful portrayal of the Jewish priests. Caiaphas (Mattia Sbragia), the head priest and his entourage, including the crowd, are seen as rude, unruly people with long unkempt beards and bad teeth instigating the Roman governor, Pontius Pilate (Hristo Shopov) to crucify Jesus. There're obviously nice Jews in the film, like Simon helping Jesus to carry the cross. And Gibson omitting the line from the movie, "Let his blood be on us and on our children" in the book of Matthew 27:25 reflects his sensitivity and perhaps uneasiness with modern-day Semitism although some professors argued the line is removed from the subtitles only. But to discuss if the film is anti-Semitic is missing the point. Most Christians know that the Jews didn't kill Jesus, because it was by God's will that Jesus came to earth as man and died on the cross for our sins. That is the message of the film.

Pilate, on the other hand, is portrayed more sympathetically with his remorseful glances and lingering doubts. His wife, Claudia (Claudia Gerini) even passes some towels to Mary and Mary Magdalene to wipe Jesus' blood, although it wasn't mentioned in the scriptures (Gibson has based the film on the Gospels and visions from 18th century nuns Sister Anne Emmerich and Mary of Agreda).

It's a daring attempt on Gibson's part to interpret the film his way by referencing from various sources and it has paid off at the box office - the US$125 million (S$211 million) raked in its first 5 days of release speak volumes of its commercial viability - it is well envisioned, but nevertheless, one should only enjoy the technique and art and not the psychological nature of the film.

Gibson's bold and daredevil approach to use the bloody imagery is visually profound and in your face. A scene on the ground where Jesus' blood is spilled is captured from a towering view, reminding the viewer of the hatred of man, the burden of sin, the innocence of Jesus' blood and how metaphysically removed we are from the presence and essence of God. Gibson is also a director who values aesthetic distance. In a scene where Christ is crucified on Calvary, the audience is taken from a point-of-view shot up in the sky and then we see a drop of rain falling. It's a startling imagery of a tearing heaven and a symbol of God watching from above.

Cinematographer Caleb Deschanel paints like a traditional and simple artist who uses 2 contrasting and powerful colours - of bright golden and yellow hues, and dark grey and black hues - to depict the good and evil in the film. The soundtrack from John Debney is eerie, haunting and most of the times, you can hear the suffering in those painful scores - in 1 of the tracks where Judas hangs himself, Gibson is heard screaming and Debney likens in Cinescape the wailing to "complete despair".

Despite the conspicuous absence of Hollywood stars to give the film a more self-reliant and independent feel, the relatively unknown actors and actresses (except for Bellucci) are remarkably impressive. Look into Caviezel's eyes and gritted teeth and you can feel his anguish, every moan insufferable and every scream painful. Caviezel's performance is juxtaposed against Morgenstern's soft, maternal and muted torture as Mary watching Jesus' ordeal. Her performance is deeply moving and epitomises the power of the silent. The rest of the cast, from Shopov's Pilate and Luca Lionello's Judas are equally wonderful, an example of how the skilful European actors are comparable to those across the Atlantic.

Although Gibson is suspected of manipulation and milking sympathy from devout Christians for the movie, his direction is masterful, a result of his conviction and belief in carrying this movie through on his own US$30 million (S$50 million) budget. The Passion of the Christ may lack the spiritual guidance (other than a few and very brief flashbacks to some of Jesus' teachings) the world-weary in us need, but it's a resourceful medium for the viewer to finally comprehend the nature of Christ's sufferance beyond the description of the simplistic and literal scripture phrases we've all been used to.

Mel Gibson is a brave heart because he isn't intimidated by detractors and has successfully made The Passion of the Christ into one of the most relevant movies in today's world where people live in fear of suicide bombings, high school shootings, a world of Catholic priests who sexually abuse young boys and hedonistic soccer players. His article of faith and conviction, and the film itself, are the antithesis of an establishment where Hollywood is the church and the worshippers are people who idolise overrated million-dollar celebrities.

Note: The film is the first in Singapore to be rated M18 after several years of public debate over questionable censorship guidelines (If a Singaporean boy can carry a M16 rifle at 18 years old, why can't he watch a surreal film with violence or nudity?). This must be an act of God.