![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Jesus Chainsaw Massacre
Feb. 27th, 2004 01:03 amOr my thoughts on The Passion of the Christ.
First I must state that I am neither a Christian nor a biblical scholar, so I cannot offer much commentary about the accuracy of the film. Instead I'll offer my favorite sort of opinion--viewer response.
Yes, it was violent. There was a lotta Passion, most of it puddling under Jim Caviezel and dripping on the ground. And Cassius Longinus channeled the spirit of Dario Argento for a minute.
Yes, there were a looottttt ooooffff sllooowwww mmmmooootttionnn scenes. A few too many for my taste. They lose their power after the first dozen. Not every shot of Jesus falling needed to be slow-mo.
And yes, through the damned palms. That bugged me.
In spite of this, I liked the movie. I didn't expect a radical, daring interpretation of the death of Jesus, so I wasn't disappointed there. I expected the director's vision of the biblical narrative, and that's what I got. To me it was a narrative I enjoyed.
The casting was good, even if we did have yet another white Jesus. (He's less white than Willem Dafoe, does that count?) Everyone did a good job of emoting with limited dialogue. I enjoyed Hristo Shopov's Pilate--a rather forgiving portrayal. And of course, Monica Belluci is always proof of the existence of a benevolent god. If those weren't contacts, Jim Caviezel has gorgeous eyes.
While the blood was a bit much--Jesus looked like raw meat sculpture by the end--for the most part I found the film nicely understated. Note the camera focus during the "Mother, behold thy son. Son, behold they mother" moment. In the words of Rufus the Apostle, "to think that a married couple never got down, that's just plain gullibility." :)
To me, the film wasn't preachy. I choose to interpret it as the director's vision of his faith, and it was a vision I can accept. I won't be taking communion on Sunday, but I enjoyed the film.
First I must state that I am neither a Christian nor a biblical scholar, so I cannot offer much commentary about the accuracy of the film. Instead I'll offer my favorite sort of opinion--viewer response.
Yes, it was violent. There was a lotta Passion, most of it puddling under Jim Caviezel and dripping on the ground. And Cassius Longinus channeled the spirit of Dario Argento for a minute.
Yes, there were a looottttt ooooffff sllooowwww mmmmooootttionnn scenes. A few too many for my taste. They lose their power after the first dozen. Not every shot of Jesus falling needed to be slow-mo.
And yes, through the damned palms. That bugged me.
In spite of this, I liked the movie. I didn't expect a radical, daring interpretation of the death of Jesus, so I wasn't disappointed there. I expected the director's vision of the biblical narrative, and that's what I got. To me it was a narrative I enjoyed.
The casting was good, even if we did have yet another white Jesus. (He's less white than Willem Dafoe, does that count?) Everyone did a good job of emoting with limited dialogue. I enjoyed Hristo Shopov's Pilate--a rather forgiving portrayal. And of course, Monica Belluci is always proof of the existence of a benevolent god. If those weren't contacts, Jim Caviezel has gorgeous eyes.
While the blood was a bit much--Jesus looked like raw meat sculpture by the end--for the most part I found the film nicely understated. Note the camera focus during the "Mother, behold thy son. Son, behold they mother" moment. In the words of Rufus the Apostle, "to think that a married couple never got down, that's just plain gullibility." :)
To me, the film wasn't preachy. I choose to interpret it as the director's vision of his faith, and it was a vision I can accept. I won't be taking communion on Sunday, but I enjoyed the film.
