Five years after its release, what is the legacy of The Passion of the Christ?

Mel Gibson’s blockbuster about the Crucifixion of Jesus was a culture-war touchstone when it opened on February 25, 2004. The Passion was in the right place at the right time: it opened in the midst of a divisive Presidential campaign and a heated debate about whether domestic and international forces—secularism at home and extremism abroad—would nullify Christianity as a potent force in the world.

The Passion had a tremendous influence on that debate. It is undeniable that the film played a crucial role in George W. Bush’s re-election to the Presidency. Were it not for the galvanizing force that the film (and the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s November 2003 ruling on same-sex marriage) had on evangelical voters, John Kerry would have pulled off a victory that fall. The film reaffirmed their faith, and reawakened their desire to have a man who shared that faith in the White House.

There are many reasons why the film was so aggressively attacked by major critics. One reason is that these critics understood the motivational force that this film would have for the so-called religious right. The assaults on the film had an explicit political motivation; these critics sought to smear the film as being unworthy of the ticket price, so as to prevent viewers from being emotionally touched by the picture, and having that experience influence them for weeks and months.

Roger Ebert was one of the few major critics to give the film high praise. In a four-star Chicago Sun-Times review, Ebert declared that the film was “…[a] personal message movie of the most radical kind, attempting to re-create events of personal urgency….The filmmaker has put his artistry and fortune at the service of his conviction and belief, and that doesn't happen often.”

Further, Ebert noted that he “…was moved by the depth of feeling, by the skill of the actors and technicians, by their desire to see this project through no matter what. To discuss individual performances, such as James Caviezel's heroic depiction of the ordeal, is almost beside the point. This isn't a movie about performances, although it has powerful ones, or about technique, although it is awesome, or about cinematography (although Caleb Deschanel paints with an artist's eye), or music (although John Debney supports the content without distracting from it). It is a film about an idea. An idea that it is necessary to fully comprehend the Passion if Christianity is to make any sense. Gibson has communicated his idea with a singleminded urgency. Many will disagree. Some will agree, but be horrified by the graphic treatment. I myself am no longer religious in the sense that a long-ago altar boy thought he should be, but I can respond to the power of belief whether I agree or not, and when I find it in a film, I must respect it.”

Ebert also argued that The Passion was “…the most violent film I have ever seen.” As much as I like and respect Ebert, I always felt that he inserted this line into his review as a way to blow off whatever negative heat he expected to receive from fellow politically progressive critics. Black Hawk Down was far more off-the-charts violent than The Passion. No question about it.

Gibson’s film was a tremendous achievement, an emotionally wrenching yet intellectually captivating experience. James Caviezel delivered one of the best performances of this decade as Jesus. Maia Morgenstern (as Mary) and Monica Bellucci (as Mary Magdalene) also delivered superior work. Gibson’s artistry, his talent and his faith are evident in every second of the film.

Of course, The Passion was attacked for alleged anti-Semitism upon its release. While there were some scenes that Gibson would have been wise to exclude because they could have been easily misinterpreted, the film as a whole does not come across as intentionally anti-Semitic, a point Ebert noted in his Sun-Times review. Thus, I’ll always be more than a little angry at Gibson for his infamous hate-filled tirade following his arrest on DUI charges in California in July 2006. With a handful of venomous words, Gibson humiliated and embarrassed religious and secular conservatives who defended him against charges of intolerance when The Passion was released. While the film itself is bias-free, one cannot say the same about its creator.

I’ll always remember what it was like seeing The Passion: the emotional intensity of the film, the excellence of its performances, the tears of sorrow and expressions of faith by members of the audience. There will never be a movie like The Passion again. There will never be a cultural moment like the day it was released.