Log in

No account? Create an account
A passionate evening with Tina - Chronarchy — LiveJournal

> Recent Entries
> Archive
> Friends
> Profile
> Chronarchy.com

Ár nDraíocht Féin
Three Cranes
Chaos Matrix

March 23rd, 2005

Previous Entry Share Next Entry
09:45 am - A passionate evening with Tina
The other night, I watched The Passion of the Christ with Tina. (And yes, I linked the DVD to Amazon through ADF's referral program, so if you buy it, ADF will get a cut of the cash!)

It was, officially, the most mediocre movie I have ever seen. But I had some thoughts while watching it.

I did not find any anti-semitism in the flick, but then I wasn't expecting any.

I was very, very amused to see that Christ was portrayed as, literally, a run-of-the-mill magician. He didn't do anything that made him Christ-like aside from be nailed to a cross. It could have been Apuelius or Apollonius getting nailed to that cross, though, and the story could have been the same. It was a strange protrayal for someone trying to get a Christian message across.

The flashback sequences bugged me, but I also found one hilarious. There was one where he's flashing back to where he's making a table, and Mary laughs at his efforts, and I couldn't help but think of the comedy skit where they bring out some of Christ's carpentry creations and say, "Look, this is why he became a rabbi. He simply couldn't do carpentry. We think this is supposed to be a chair, but it's hard to tell. He was just bad." But the joke they told at that point was the worst.

It was much less bloody than I expected, but Christ still took his beatings almost with indifference. Yeah, he sure looks like he's in pain, but he sure never vocalizes it. It's like he was something more than human, in that he never cried out in pain. WTF? I thought we were supposed to care becase he was human? And here I am thinking they need to hit the son of God harder because he's not screaming yet. Not the way to win sympathy.

The effects were pretty "okay" as well. I didn't see anything really good. His use of minitures and bad CGI is unprecidented in modern cinema, though, and maybe he could have gotten an Oscar for mediocrity of effects.

I was pleased that the two hour movie seemed to go by very quickly, though. I think that's why I call it mediocre. I wasn't staring at it bored for as long as I could have been.

I think that if you're interested in a portrayal of the life, death and ressurection of Christ, you could get about the same quality movie from a hundred other sources. I hear that the Church of Mormon will send you one for free, if you ask. That might be a better deal. We borrowed our copy from the library, so no cash flow back to Mel from us.

And this movie wouldn't convert anyone. Not a single soul. It simply doesn't tell the story effectively. There's no sense that the guy on screen is dying for your sins. There's no feeling of justice or right (or even wrong). You would have to actually know the story to be able to figure out what the hell is going on at the end (pun not intended).

This movie did not deserve an Oscar for anything, I'm sorry to say. Mel can bitch and moan and complain, but there was no major achievement made with this movie. No one stood out. The storyline isn't original, that's for sure, and the effects just aren't very good.

My final statement though is the one I thought throughout the whole movie: "WTF is Mel doing? He has all that Monica Bellucci, and he's not using it!" It's a crime to put that woman in baggy clothes that cover her body.

I give it two and a half nails out of five wounds.
Current Mood: amusedamused
Current Music: "Coconut Telegraph", -JB

(21 comments Leave a comment)


[User Picture]
Date:March 24th, 2005 05:37 am (UTC)
I did find the movie anti-Semitic, especially when Mary Magdalene begged the Roman soldiers to save Jesus from the Jews. That seems like a bit of a revision to me.

But I agree with you about the violence and gore. It didn't live up to its hype (Vampire kids hunting Judas notwithstanding). And I was surprised that there was actually a spiritual message in the movie - the reason for Jesus' suffering according to Satan was to save humanity (he kept saying, "No one is strong enough to do what must be done;" "Give up, and you won't have to suffer anymore," etc.) I disagree with the theology, but at least it was there.

The only thing I really liked about the movie was that it was subtitled. It was fun recognizing when they were speaking Aramaic, Latin, or Hebrew, and seeing who spoke what to whom. (Both Jesus and Pilate spoke Latin and Aramaic, but when they were speaking alone with each other, it was in Latin. I like little touches like that.)
[User Picture]
Date:March 24th, 2005 02:06 pm (UTC)
I'd have to re-read my gospels, as well as the other works this thing was based on, to tell whether that's a revision or not.

The problem I had with the message is that it wasn't clear. If you didn't already know the message, there's no way you would have been able to figure it out from the ramblings of Satan.

I was thinking about the subtitles, actually. I think subtitles make any acting believable. You don't hear the things that tip you off that the acting is bad. Proof can be found on daytime television. Watch a soap opera with the subtitles turned on and you'll see what I mean. :) Soaps are almost believable without the actors' voices.

And I, too, enjoyed picking out the various languages.

> Go to Top