Except for the opening prayer in the woods of Kesimani Garden, which is blue, most of the images tend to be yellow. The color of bronze, the color of sand, the color of linen robes. The tones are unified and solemn, as if the sand and stone have been sharpened, and the atmosphere of a distant era comes out. The costumes of the characters are very delicate and attractive, simple and delicate, with a dark color, which restores the appearance of all beings in the early AD. Every shot has a solemn element in it, and it can be seen that it has been carefully designed. The composition of many scenes may refer to the oil paintings of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, and it always feels familiar. There's plenty of slow motion: Judas reaches for the purse, Jesus falls over and over, tears slide from the eyes of the Virgin, with mastery without being flashy. The overall effect of the image is very good, full of atmosphere, and simple and powerful.
The plot and characters are also quite simple and concentrated. The two-hour film, with the exception of a short interlude of past events, recreates the entire process of Jesus' crucifixion: arrest, trial, death, and execution. With the victim Jesus as the center, the judges, the Jewish priest Caiaphas, the Roman governor Pilate, and others, and the victims Mary, Magdalene, and John, interspersed with Judas, Peter, Simon, etc. Characters, the structure is very simple.
Several main characters, Jesus: As the protagonist, his lines in the film are very few, and most of them are quoted from the Bible. Because I'm not a believer, I don't feel much listening to it. When he was beaten, he seemed very quiet, and the occasional moan that he couldn't help piercing his nerves. Most of the time he was disheveled and covered in blood, and his right eye was always swollen. I like his eyes, stoic and innocent, painful and serene. After being arrested, Jesus saw the Virgin in the crowd outside the sanctuary. The two stared at each other, silent but infinitely implicated. The life of the mother and son in the memory is a rare episode with a warm atmosphere in the whole film. I always hoped that God had something more human, so I was inexplicably moved by Jesus' light kiss on Mary's face.
Mary: That's how the Virgin is supposed to be, isn't it? Generous, pathetic, loving, full of maternal warmth. Maria is dressed in black and has a relatively square face, not very beautiful but very temperamental. Her own child was suffering, she just stared silently, her grief deep in her eyes. After Jesus was caught, there was a scene where Magdalene and John walked through the street with her, and Mary suddenly stopped, took a few steps back, and bent down to get close to the ground. The camera pans down, across the ground, and it's Jesus hanging in the air. Jesus seemed to sense his mother's embrace, which was a wonderful feeling. On the way to carrying the cross, Jesus fell, and Mary seemed to see the young Jesus fall in front of her, and jumped up to help him. The two sets of shots are intertwined here, making me cry.
Judas: At the beginning, in the dark yellow tone, Caiaphas threw the purse at Judas, Judas stretched out his hands to catch it, his whole body shook, and the coins scattered on the ground. This shot has been slow processed and it is very beautiful. Can't understand why Judas betrayed Jesus when the result of betrayal was self-destruction. Judas had been terrified, and after witnessing the humiliation and beating of Jesus, he threw the money back to Caiaphas, but his heart was not at peace. He betrayed his master and pushed him on the long road of suffering. And he himself, driven by his inner demon, had nowhere to stay, and finally hanged himself. Judas didn't have many points, and it died after thirty minutes. The performance of the actors was very exciting.
The other actors are also basically competent. Peter shakes his faith in the face of Jesus' suffering, shouting "I don't know him" for self-defense; Monica Bellucci's Magdalene beautifully performs weeping; Faithful John watches Jesus in the crowd When suffering, a man’s tears are always more moving than a woman’s; Simon was moved from reluctance at first to being moved by Jesus’ silent enduring; a pious woman gave Jesus water (looks like Sofia Coppola) but was thrown over by soldiers; and gloomy The Caiaphas and the hesitant Pilate... The movie doesn't have much character excavation. The characters themselves are well-known, and the important thing is that they must conform to the image in people's minds. Therefore, most of the actors' performances are sculptural, statically showing their own suffering.
A major feature of the film is the true portrayal of suffering. It was indeed a "passion", a long and painful one. Whether it's the flesh from the whipping or the blood gushing out from the crucifixion, they are all very vivid and real, without the blurring or sideways of ordinary movies. He just made you watch Jesus suffer and made you feel the pain of that crucifixion. The whips seemed to be lashing against you, and the nails were driven into your palms. That long road to Golgotha, accompanied by a moving, wordless chorus, Jesus fell again and again in great agony. It's something that can't be described in words, and you can only understand it after watching the movie.
The film was well done, but I always felt something was missing. Maybe it's because I'm not a believer, I can't really feel the religious meaning behind the suffering, or maybe the movie is too simple and too suffering. Because I originally expected more things, such as the social environment at that time, political forces, religious conflicts and so on. Jesus was welcomed into Jerusalem as a prophet and a saint. Why was he put to death a few days later? At that time, the contradiction between the Roman ruler and the Jewish people, the contradiction between Judaism and the teachings of Jesus—these causes and consequences were only slightly manifested in Pilate’s hesitation about putting Jesus to death, and he felt very anemic. On the other hand, being nailed to the cross was the mission of Jesus, and he suffered as a scapegoat for mankind, so the shaping of Jesus' image should go a little deeper. But obviously the premise set by the director for the audience is: everyone has read the Bible, everyone is familiar with the history of that era, everyone understands what the characters in the film represent, so he spends more time and footage Used to show the suffering process, not the suffering background. When I watch it, I always feel that it lacks a little dramatic conflict, lacks the external driving force for the development of the plot, and lacks the sense of history. However, religious-themed films are not easy to make in the first place. Even such a simple film has attracted a lot of criticism. If history is played out, Mel Gibson's second half of his life will not be easy.
View more about The Passion of the Christ reviews
