I am not a particularly religious person.  I went to a Catholic school for five years (first through fifth grade) and was raised Catholic, but somewhere along the way I made a decision that organized religion had nothing left to offer me.  If anything, I am suspicious of the motives and sincerity of religion these days.  I have no problem with people who are genuine about their faith as long as they respect my right not to follow it, and I find a majority of the religious people that I meet to be great people.  They practice what they believe, and genuinely have faith.  I just want you to know where I'm coming from because, in discussion about this film, I think that is extremely important.

The Passion of the Christ is the story of the last 12 hours of the life of Jesus of Nazareth.  The film basically follows the Stations of the Cross with some occasional flashbacks to other moments in Christ's life.  This film has sparked a lot of controversy, and I'd like to address that briefly.  Mel Gibson is not an anti-Semite.  Yes, the film places much of the blame for Jesus's death on SOME JEWISH PEOPLE, specifically the High Priest of the Pharisees, Caiphas.  Now to say that Mel Gibson blames all Jewish people for the death of Jesus is to also suggest that he blames all white people, all people over 30, and all men with beards.  No, he is placing blame for the death of Jesus on the people he feels campaigned the hardest for it, those people being the men who were in positions of power and were threatened by the teachings of Jesus.  If you're in a position of power and threatened by the teachings of Jesus now, I'm sorry, but you still don't qualify because you weren't around 1971 years ago.  To say that Gibson's attitudes towards Caiphas represent his attitudes towards Jews in general is incredibly ignorant.  So, I'll repeat, Mel Gibson is not an anti-Semite.  If someone turns you down for a bank loan specifically because you're Jewish, that person is an anti-Semite...maybe.  Disagree?  Send me an email and expect a response.

It's hard to say that I liked this film because that would imply that I would watch it over and over again at my leisure.  I think it is extremely effective and beautifully photographed and directed, but because most of the film is comprised of watching a misunderstood man brutally tortured and crucified, it isn't pleasant to watch.  I'm glad that I saw it, and I'll buy it on DVD, but I can't tell you under what circumstances I would watch it again.  Injustice is one of those things that really gets to me, and this film invokes a strong emotional response.  I'd like to interrupt here and say DO NOT take children to see this.  First of all, it is rated R, and I think that is being kind.  Beating a man with bamboo reeds and thorned whips is violent business, and being nailed to a cross is no picnic either.  Keep that in mind when you're considering educating your kids on Christ's death.  There are other ways to do that.  This film pulls no punches.  If I saw this as a child, I'd be terrified every time I saw a crucifix.  The press is all about the violence in this film, so I think it has been covered enough.  It's a violent film about a violent event, let's move on.

Jim Caviezel does an amazing job portraying Jesus.  I've seen The Last Temptation of Christ, and I thought Willem Dafoe's Jesus was kind of a whacko.  Caviezel plays Jesus as serene, confident, and faithful.  During his prosecution and torture, he has no delusions about where he is headed, but he still shows the audience the incredible pain of his sacrifice.  During the flashbacks, Caviezel's Jesus is soft-spoken with an edge of sadness because he's aware of his ultimate fate.  I think the other person who really shines in the film is Rosalinda Celentano, who plays Satan.  She stalks Jesus with so much menace in the Garden of Olives, and peers at him through the crowd during his trial and while he's carrying the cross.  Satan is not the antagonist of the film, bur rather portrayed as just being present, and trying to fill Jesus with doubt about his purpose.  She only has a few lines of dialogue, but I really liked her scenes.  The other actors and actresses in the film, while all very good, just didn't blow me away.  They just don't have the time or the variety of scenes to really do something interesting.  I think Gibson's direction is top notch, but even more so is the cinematography by Caleb Deschanel.  The film has a darkness and depth that I haven't seen in a Jesus movie before.  It's hard to believe that they only spent $25 million on this picture, because the lighting alone looks like a high budget film.

I think The Passion of the Christ is definitely worth seeing, and a "must-see" if you're an adult regular church-goer.  I also believe that if you have not seen the film, you shouldn't involve yourself in discussions about it concerning whether or not it faults the Jewish religion.  Go see the film with an open mind and make an informed decision like an intelligent adult.  I will agree with many reviewers out there in saying that a lot of what you take into the film is what you get out of it.  To me, it is a moving portrayal about the death of the most historic figure.  If you don't believe that, check your calendar.  That four-digit number at the end isn't the number of years since Napoleon was born.