Critic's Grade: A+

Mel Gibson stirs up emotions and religion, as well as controversy, with his epic telling of the final twelve hours in the life of Jesus Christ. Although piled high with realistic blood and gore, the accounts of the brutal crucifixion of Christ are portrayed in a beautiful, moving powerhouse that may be the greatest film variation of Christ yet.

"The Passion of the Christ" is the film that Mel Gibson will be remembered for. Since his Oscar-winning turn as director for the 1995 epic "Braveheart," "The Passion" contains what Gibson achieved with his previous effort: Realism and a splendid presentation. The film is also presented in such accuracy that it is told in the language that Christ himself may have spoken. The Aramayac language (I hope I spelled it right) is blended with earlier routes of Latin, and although it is subtitled, they have no effect on the well-crafted story and intrigue that the film offers.

I can also say that I have never seen as much brutality as I did with this movie. As we are all probably forced to believe, Christ's crucifixion is apparently bloodless and clean, with no mention of whippings, brutal beatings or even the remote image of blood drizzling out of his hands during the moment when he is nailed to the cross. But we are given the horror and gruesome gore that the witnesses to Christ's death had most likely seen themselves. By the end of his legacy, Christ is covered with lacerations, slashes, cuts, holes and is drenched in blood from head to toe. The seemingly endless brutality is so powerful that it can break the hardest audience member. Tears are usually the case while viewing this film, and it is no wonder why. For those who have believed and been strong followes of the teachings that Christ brought forth actually get to witness what may have happened, and his crucifixion depicted in this manner gives another reason to hold strong to his values and feel for him.

Jim Caviezel, a seldom-great actor, gives one of the best performances I have ever seen on the big screen. His portrayal of Jesus is extremely powerful. Another plus on his behalf is the ability to quickly learn "The Passion's" language and speak it in such great detail. Although his voice is not of the English tongue, we can feel the crackling as he bears with the pain of being beaten by the viscious Roman guards that had attacked him.

The supporting cast, led by Monica Bellucci, is indeed impressive as well. The only complaint is the mingled appearances of Satan, portrayed as a grimacing, sharp-toothed woman played by Rosalinda Celentano. Even though "The Passion" is religious, Satan should have been left out. Is there any evidence of his arrival on Earth at that moment? What incarnation did he take if he did arrive at Christ's crucifixion? Perhaps the portrayal of Satan as a mother would also be offensive. Luca Lionello portrays Judas, troubled and still faithful to Jesus, with intensity and great depth, almost on the same scale as Caviezel. After Caviezel endured whippings, lightning strikes, mass criticism, wouldn't it be fit for him to win a best actor Oscar next year? If this film is considered at any major awards, I would say that Gibson's direction, Caviezel's acting, Luca Lionello's great job as Judas and the film itself should be considered as bests in their class.

"The Passion of the Christ" is one of the most gripping films in recent history. It is the most accurate telling of Jesus's life, and it is the most gruesome telling none the less. Mel Gibson may get slammed by other forces, but I believe that he did a spectacular job. "The Passion" will be remembered forever.

My Score: 10 (out of 10)

All Reviews by Jordan Boyd
If you are the author of this review, you may edit it by signing in.