Just a few years ago, Mel Gibson's The Passion of Christ stirred controversy or delight in the hearts of many around the world. In my opinion, no other movie has drawn so much discussion. However, the movie was not nominated for the Oscar's category of Best Picture. Did the guild of voters make a mistake?

I believe that any movie that deserves a Best Picture nomination must achieve the following: The movie must make you feel present, you want to keep watching as the movie ends, and you walk out the movie understanding the plot and conclusion without further help from your friends. The Passion of Christ clearly passed this test. It was an epic story in the tradition of the movie Gladiator or the Ten Commandments. While some may argue the movie was Anti-Semitic, I could not agree with their statements.

Mel Gibson's Passion of Christ was based loosely on Sister Anne Emmerich's book, The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. Some of the scenes in the movie which did not come from the Bible came from Sister Anne's vision. Nevertheless, the movie was good enough to garner a Best Picture nomination.

The Passion of Christ was a moving movie to both believers and non-believers of Jesus Christ. Some also believed Jim Caviezel, who played Jesus Christ should have been nominated for Best Actor. I could not disagree more. Caviezel was not even the best actor in the movie. I really thought Mary, the mother of Jesus (Maia Morgenstern and Mary Magdalene (Monica Bellucci) stole the show. Yes, Caviezel suffered during the making of this movie. He was struck by lightening, sleep deprived, accidentally beaten with the real props and more. Unfortunately, Caviezel did not bring anything extra to the movie. At the end of the movie, Jesus (Caviezel) raises from his sleep, but he looked more like "Buddy" Christ. Still the movie was worthy to receive an A rating from me!

Other Movie Articles

ATL

The Gospel

Why G Rated Movies Make More Money?
Movie Review Homepage