No one who was awake in 2004 could have missed the swirl of controversy that surrounded The Passion. The film tells the story of Christ's suffering and Crucifixion with rich symbolism as well as beautiful and brutal imagery. The movie is largely image driven, with only a sparse amount of dialogue, translated from Aramaic and Latin into English subtitles. The film is extremely intense, and audience members should be prepared for a lasting emotional impact. When casting the movie, Gibson made the judicious choice to avoid famous actors. His Satan is simultaneously beautiful and creepy, and his Mary is the appropriate counterpart.
Critics have raised three main objections to The Passion:
(1) The film is too violent.The Passion depicts Christ’s crucifixion in gory detail, and has been labeled sadistic by some. In opposition, one might argue that the subject matter is necessarily violent; the violence is severe, graphic, and prolonged, but unlike the gratuitous violence of many movies today, it is essential to the film, it has a purpose, and it cannot leave the viewer unaffected. The suffering of Christ seems real; even a generation inured by violence in movies may be deeply unsettled by the bloodshed in this film. For once, the violence of a film is integral to the story, and for once it serves not to inure the audience, but to heighten its sensitivity. Though at times nearly overwhelming, the scenes of Christ's passion are broken up by flashbacks to His time with His mother and His disciples. This serves both to reveal the meaning of His sufferings and to grant the audience a respite from the constant violence.