Customer Reviews

The Passion: Photography from the Movie "The Passion of the Christ"

5 star:		(82)
4 star:		(8)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(12)

 

 

This superbly crafted, photographed and carefully scripted book, along with the wonderful daily vespers book "His Passion' (see my review) provide an excellent set of companion material for those moved to action by the experience of the film itself, and who want to explore more into both the project Mel Gibson embarked on in the making of the film as well as the particualr sect of scriptural teachings informing the endeavor. It also provides Gibson for a forum in which he can explain the project and deal with the multitude of criticism emanating from both the secular and wider religious communities.

As a result of these considerations, the reader is presented with a great deal of relevant material explaining why Gibson chose to use some fairly obscure and narrow interpretations of the events surrounding Jesus' Passion during the final days of His life on earth. For example, within the pages of the foreword of the book, Gibson explains how he came to depend so heavily on the use of Biblical passages from the "New Living Translation" version of the Bible almost exclusively as the material for the spoken dialogue in the script. He also articulates why he deliberately decided to use more original antique languages along with English subtitles in order to maximize the authenticity of the moviegoer's experience of the final twelve hours of Jesus' life.

The book works quite well, using the combination of both diverting text and a wonderful collage of stunning photographs to display the movie-making experience. One caution, however; those who have not seen the movie should be aware that Gibson assumes those reading the book have seen the epic, and although one can get a fairly good representation of the film from the book, it is clearly no substitute for the experience itself. I highly recommend the book for people who have seen the movie and who want to extend the experience with a wonderfully reproduced book that showcases both Gibson's artistry and the magic talents of his cinematographer's craft. Enjoy!

...Mel Gibson obviously cares about the Lord, he was brave enough to make this movie(which cost him 27 million dollars) even if he might have been ridiculed for it which is what you are doing right now. It is an amazing movie and I read Mark in the bible. Some of the lines in the movie are EXACTLY what jesus said, such as, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" Mark 15:34. Jesus DID suffer in such a way that is depicted in the movie. Even the pope said, "It is as it was." Please consider the hard work and dedication that was put into this movie. I don't want this comment to discourage ANYONE from seeing this movie or reading the book, because both are amazing.

An excellent book inspired by the Mel Gibson film. Breathtaking photographs and behind the scenes insight into the production combined with Gibson's foreward explaining his inspiration for making it, result in a powerful book.

It's not my habit to comment on other people's "reviews," but the "reader from Seattle"'s remarks need addressing, especially since it's obvious from "reader from Seattle"'s statements that "reader from Seattle" did not, and likely will not, read the book (and therefore should not be cluttering up these boards with a "review"):

"Reader from Seattle" says "Perhaps worst of all, Gibson's emphasis on the idea that Jesus 'died for the sins of humanity' is misguided and only fuels the aggression of the Religious Right."

The idea that Jesus "died for the sins of all humanity" is the WHOLE POINT of the story. It comes directly from the Bible - directly from the mouth of Jesus himself. Even if one does not accept that the Bible was written by God through Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, these apostles were the ONLY witnesses to His life and words. His words make it clear he died for the sins of mankind. YOU are misguided.

Furthermore, if, as "reader from Seattle" says, "Jesus allowed himself to be arrested, knowing he would probably be killed, to provide a good example of the loving and forgiving pacifist and martyr," why doesn't "reader from Seattle" follow that example? Why does "reader from Seattle" worry about the "aggression of the Religious Right," or anyone else whose message "reader from Seattle" fears and disagrees with? Why not follow Jesus' supposed example by being loving and forgiving of the Religious Right? If the TRUE Christian doctrine is to "judge not...love his enemies and turn the other cheek," why don't YOU do that in regards to them?

As for your claim that you doubt "we'll ever find out when that doctrine about Jesus 'dying for our sins' was created," it was created by God, you dufus. It's right there in the Bible. You will certainly find out when you are face to face with Jesus at the final judgment.

In closing, I'd like to suggest that "reader from Seattle" either accept what Jesus said about himself, or ignore him entirely. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are the only reliable witnesses to the life and words of Jesus. If what they report isn't true, ignore it completely, but don't rewrite it. Of course, that's not really possible since there is no ignoring God even if you refuse to acknowledge Him. Of course, you and others hostile to the TRUE doctrine of Christianity want everyone to ignore Jesus which is why Mel Gibson's film has been so aggressively attacked. Charges that it's anti-semetic are a mere red herring. What offends people is that a major Oscar winning director and universally recognized film star has dared to make a film about Jesus as savior. Our society is corrupt and the corruptors don't want anything to remind people of that corruption or of the cure for it. But it's difficult to ignore a filmmaker of Gibson's immense popularity. God bless him.

Other readers have commented on the movie as well as the book. I want to comment just on the book. It might seem that there is no need to buy the book if you have seen the movie (which I thought was wonderful). But when you see the still photos you can appreciate, in a way that you can't in the theatre (because you are so pulled into the story) how gorgeous the movie is. Many of the stills look like paintings and are reminiscent of Rembrandt and Vermeer as well as Caravaggio. I only regret that there were not even more photos. I wanted one of the scene where Mary holds Christ in the pose of Michelangelo's Pieta, for instance. However, there was a good selection.

Mel Gibson states in his lovely forward to this book that the "word which best defines" what guided him, as well as others involved in the production of this brilliant film, was "aletheia", Greek for what would translate as "unforgetting". With this book we can remember this magnificent film, and the impact it has had on our lives.

The outline of the film, portions of the script (by Gibson and Benedict Fitzgerald), as well as the Biblical references to each scene, are alongside still photographs taken during the filming by Ken Duncan and Philippe Antonello.
The marvel of this book is that one can examine at leisure the extraordinary work that went into the production design by Francesco Frigeri, the set decoration by Carlo Gervasi...take note of the marvelous oil lamp "tree" on pg. 43, that is in the governor's quarters...and the amazing costume design by Maurizio Millenotti, which I can only assume must have had hand-loomed cloth made especially for them.

Jim Caviezel is in my opinion the most perfect depiction of Jesus on film, physically strong enough to be a first century carpenter, and with a face that reminds me of Masaccio's Lord.
The sublime photographs for me are the Jesus on pg. 25, in a flashback scene while at home with Mary working on a table; Mary, in an outstanding portrayal by Romanian actress Maia Morgenstern, with her face to the floor, as she senses Jesus below in an underground cell on pg. 38; Mary Magdalene, beautiful in every way as played by Monica Bellucci on pg. 73; and most astounding, on pg. 114, His feet. Nailed and red with blood, this photograph moves me to tears, a work of astonishing art as well as faith.
The final six pages contain photos from the production. Solidly constructed with good quality paper and a semi-gloss finish, this is an excellent book, for unforgetting.

'The Passion' has got to be the greatest movie on Jesus Christ that was ever created. It deserves more than 5 stars. I heard someone comment that many Jewish individuals have suffered more than Jesus during his passion. But remember, what makes Jesus Christ's trial and death so dramatic is not just the horrible physical pain that he suffered; but the fact that he was totally innocent and without sin his entire life, which is a character trait that none of us can truthfully say that we partake of. And as the Lamb of God, he physically and spiritually bore the weight of all the sins of creation. Besides, if we think that just the degree of physical suffering alone is the only thing worthy of merit in life, than we should show greater respect towards roaches and ants than to people. However, we must also remember that it wasn't every Roman and Israelite that hurt Jesus and made him suffer, but those few nefarious individuals that happened to have Roman citizenship or who were of Jewish decent. And they were surely people first before they could ever be categorized by anyone as being Roman or Semitic. Both Christians and those of Jewish faith would be mistaken in generalizing any ethnic and religious group and not considering them as individuals, especially the two groups that make up the Gospels. The former, because we would wrongly assume that every Roman and person of Jewish faith is bad; and the latter, because those of Jewish faith would wrongly assume that every person of Jewish decent is good no matter who they were or what they did. Common sense will tell us that no human group, religious or otherwise, has ever been totally good in its makeup throughout all of its history on Earth. Also, I think Mel Gibson's film seems to stress the point that the majority of the human race is bad. All sorts of other people tend to differ on this viewpoint. This is an debating issue concerning the movie and book that unfortunately nobody wants to debate about since the anti-semitic accusations are so strongly in play.

A previous reviewer called "The Passion" a handsome book, but then asked "Why Latin and Aramaic?" claiming that the use of these languages "presents a serious academic issue". He then added that "any school boy in England knows that the original version of the New Testament was in Greek, not Aramaic and certainly not Latin" and that "the more common spoken language in the area was Greek". The reviewer ended by calling these "significant historical gaffes".

Well, I'm no school boy in England, but I think that I know why Mel chose to use Latin and Aramaic in his film/book. He had the Romans speak Latin because...[drum roll]...the Romans of that day spoke Latin. The whole region was under Roman rule at the time of Christ, and Latin was the language of the Roman Empire.

Similarly, Mel had the Jews speak Aramaic because the Jews of that day (including Jesus) spoke Aramaic. Aramaic was the language of the Jews since they returned from captivity in Babylon. The Gospel according to Matthew [27:46] even records Jesus' last words in Aramaic, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" The Jews used Hebrew only in religious services in the synagogues (if at all). Many (most?) Jews could not converse in Hebrew; it has been supplanted by Aramaic years before.

Neither the Romans nor the Jews used Greek on a daily basis.

It is simply not true that "the more common spoken language in the area was Greek." Yes, Greek was widely spoken; it was the language of education and of commerce and of more. It is well known (even here in Florida) that Greek was the lingua franca of known world at that time. However, none of those facts make Greek "the more common spoken language in the area".

True, the New Testament was written in Greek. ((Although there is serious debate over the First Gospel. There are those who think that Matthew wrote in Hebrew (although no Hebrew text survives).)) But, the New Testament was not even begun to be written for another thirty years. What does the language of the yet-to-be-written text of the New Testament have to do with the spoken dialog of Romans and Jews during the last hours of the life of Christ?

On that day, the Romans spoke Latin, and the Jews spoke Aramaic--just like in Mel's movie.

I see no significant historical gaffes.

One of the greatest movies ever produced and the book is just as good! Don't let "Anti-Semitic" accusers dissuade you from seeing the movie and reading this book. It just may be these same accusers are "Anti-Christian". They accuse Gibson of having bias and being "Anti-Semitic" when, Oh, I forgot ,,,,,,,,they're perfect people who have no bias. Yeah right. Don't let ridiculously oversensitive people accuse you or this movie. They had their minds made up WELL before they saw this movie. See the movie and buy the book! Ignore them.

I watched this movie yesterday. I had not been to the movies in over 3 years because no other movie has been able to draw me in, until now. I am a movie fanatic...I own hundreds of movies and I watch at least one every day, but I can honestly say that this is the most powerful movie I have ever seen. It has literally changed my life. I grew up a Catholic but have been away from the Church for a few years now but after seeing this movie, I want and need a closer relationship with Jesus. I can't stop thinking about this movie. I ordered this book and the soundtrack today and I can hardly wait to get them. The admiration and appreciation that I have for Mel Gibson is beyond description. His courage is amazing and inspiring. I love this movie! I love Mel Gibson and I love our Lord Jesus Christ!! By the way, I'm going to see it again next week.

The movie has been criticized as being too violent. Actually, upon seeing the film, I have to conclude that the actual problem is the fact that all previous films and plays about the Passion have been much too sanitized and nonviolent. Of course, the violence, apart from being historically accurate, is a reflection of the brutalities of the ancient world in general and the ancient Roman Empire in particular. Those liberals who complain about conservatives selectively condemning televised violence are just being silly. There is a world of difference between the careful depiction of violence in movies and the gratuitous violence that pervades modern movies and TV. Conservatives have never objected to the former, only the latter. Those who complain about the discrepancies in the Gospels are being equally silly. Apart from the fact that these discrepances are to be expected between independent eyewitness accounts, they are minor and easily reconciled with each other (much as variant newspaper accounts of the same event in no way negate the factuality of the event).

The violence makes it easy to understand elements of the Passion. For instance, the abject brutality of the scourging makes it easy to understand why many of those flagellated died on the spot. It is amazing that our Lord did not die much sooner. Then again, God the Father needed His Son to live long enough to complete His atoning Sacrifice for our sake.

Far from being anti-Semitic or otherwise portraying Jews in a unilaterally negative light, it includes portrayal of Jews as the victims of the Roman conquerors. This is shown by the derogatory remarks towards Jews by Pilate (e. g., This stinking province!...This rabble!...), as well as the Roman soldiers (e. g., An impossible people!...Help Him carry the cross--you Jew!).

I disagree with those who say that the movie didn't pay attention to His teachings. Apart from the fact that the movie was about His Passion, and not primarily about His entire life and teachings, it does include substantial references to the latter. These include flashbacks to the time of Jesus as a Boy, Jesus following the trade of His father Joseph as a carpenter, the forgiveness of the adulteress, the command to love one's enemies, the command to love one another as He had loved them, Peter's promise never to betray Him, etc.

Because He died to take away my sins, the film enabled me to see myself as His tormentor. It was I who was spitting on Him, scourging Him so savagely, making Him carry the Cross, and then nailing Him to it.

The film concludes with a good visual portrayal of His Resurrection. The grave clothes stay wrapped together while His resurrected Body passes right through them, and His Body still contains the nail marks of His Passion. A superb film! The only question is why a film of this quality had not been produced much sooner.