Mel Gibson is a limited actor. Apparently he is even more limited as a film director. Nothing is left to the imagination. If something could be told once or twice he will beat it to the ground. "Passion" tells his version of Christ's suffering, while accurate to most biblical text does he (and all those before him) have to depict Christ as pathetic, helpless and weak to make the point? Take for example the way this film Jesus answered Pilate when the former asked "Do you not know I have the power to free you, and the power to crucify you?", the answered came very faint and weak and barely audible over the loud sound track. I think a stronger statement would substantiate why he was who he said he was. But it is down this path the movie went. More beatings and sufferings ( I am not detracting the pain Jesus must have felt, being made more enormous because he was faultless to made fault, sinless to made sin for mankind's reparation) until a rather quick ending when Gibson has nothing left to say, in this narrow, one-track presentation. See it if you are searching for faith, but balance the lasting image of the mutilated, crucified Jesus with the power of the life he lived.
Review of The Passion of the Christ
