After a twelve year development process, Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ will debut nationally on February 25^th – Ash Wednesday.  The timing of the release, as well as the thorough marketing blitz within the evangelical Christian churches of America, may be aimed at rescuing the film from being the kind of potential “career killer” that Gibson has described in interviews.  As it turns out, the movie is both compelling enough and well enough produced to avoid that designation.  It will be interesting to track the long-term ramifications – financial and social – for the director/producer/financier, though.

What most people already know about this movie is that it details the last 18 hours of the life of Christ, and that the dialogue is all in dead languages.  The dark intensity of the story is foreshadowed by the opening scene, where the night time silence of an olive tree grove is broken by words of prayer – more heaved than spoken from the mouth of Jesus of Nazareth, played here by Jim Caviezel.  The harshness of the Aramaic words makes the English subtitles almost unnecessary.  It takes the familiar words, “if it’s possible, Father, take this cup from me . . .,” and turns them into a desperate plea for rescue.

The scenes that follow do what other familiar movies on the life of Jesus have not – develop the cast of surrounding characters in more than a cursory way.  First Judas Iscariot, then Simon Peter, Mary (the mother of Jesus), and others.  Cutaway sequences from earlier in Jesus’ life are used to show when each of the people near him saw him for who he was.  These flashbacks serve as a storytelling device as well as much needed moments of relief from the perpetual sense of emotional desperation created by the outraged Pharisees, screaming mobs, and brutal Roman centurions.  They create some of the more captivating moments to be certain – a mother who follows at a distance, watching her son of promise be beaten to the point that he is nearly unrecognizable; a man who had followed Jesus and then sold him out for silver, being tormented not only by his own guilt, but also by a strange dark figure who stirs up a crowd of mocking children; one of Jesus’ inner circle friends who has sworn undying allegiance, only to humiliate himself out of fear for his own skin.  And then, there’s the androgynous mystery person who is at once enticingly beautiful and chillingly evil.

Caviezel, as well as his supporting cast – mostly unknown (to Americans, anyway) European actors do a remarkable job of presenting the story.  They give depth to their characters without drawing undue attention to themselves.  Theirs were demanding roles.  Caviezel, in particular, navigates the physicality of his part with amazing strength, while allowing his body to succumb to the violent brutality that Jesus endured.

In one sense, making an interesting film on this subject would seem to be a daunting task, given that it deals with such familiar characters, stories, and times.  Really, how many times have we seen the betrayal, the sham trials, the misgivings of Pontius Pilate, the savage beatings, and then the crucifixion?  In another sense, making a quality film on this subject would seem to be quite easy, given that most of its predecessors suffered from poor production values, weak screenplays, and/or amateurish acting.  Fortunately, Gibson’s history and accomplishments as an actor, director, and producer have primed him well for both tasks, and he delivers in the way that the viewer hopes for.  There is an obvious attention to detail and accuracy, which satisfies those who demand authenticity, but also a hearty artistic element, which satisfies those who are already so well versed on the topic that they risk being bored by it all.

Make no mistake, this is a deeply emotional film.  It’s not the kind of thing one enjoys, and yet it is compelling, in the same sort of way as Steven Spielberg’s celebrated Schindler’s List and Saving Private Ryan.  It is a gory, bloody, violent, intense, relentless, draining movie to watch – well deserving of the “R” rating is has received.  There are times when I just wished Jesus would just die already.  But that, of course, is part of the point of the story. 

The cultural response to The Passion will certainly be controversial.  The claims of anti-Semitism have already been launched.  The defensive responses have already been given.  Those are certain to increase in the last couple of weeks leading up to the premier.  As noted above, there has been a major marketing effort aimed at the Christian subculture, which will produce some momentum in and of itself.  However, if Gibson is attempting to hedge his bets in order to help ensure the film’s success by using this population, he is also running the risk of marginalizing the intended impact.  It is possible that this may be “one of the most powerful evangelistic tools of the last 100 years,” as some of the promotional materials claim, but it’s also possible that the movie could be perceived by culture at large as just another banner, or worse yet, another manipulative tactic aimed at mass conversion, that the Christian community harps on.

My recommendation is that you see this film, but skip the popcorn.  It’s worth the ten bucks to see a truly artistic and powerful story.  You might even take a friend or family member with you who is curious about Jesus.  But definitely skip the popcorn – a.k.a. the hype and buzz that might cause you to have forced conversations that too often lead to frustration.  Instead, allow the movie to speak for itself (you can certainly trust it to do that), and let your friends ask their own questions and start their own conversations.  You will have plenty of opportunities to extend the story that the film expertly tells, into your own story of how Jesus has made an impact on you.