Oscars Lack 'Passion'
by Macy Hanson

The Oscar nominations are out, and the debate will soon begin about what was last year's best film. Missing from the mix, sadly, is Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ." By excluding this film from the list of best picture nominees, the Motion Picture Academy of Arts and Sciences has delegitimized the 2005 Academy Awards, while also demonstrating its disconnection with mainstream America.

I don't consider myself particularly religious, but "Passion," was by far one of the most powerful films of the last decade -- and certainly one of the five best of the last year. The fearless portrayal of Roman brutality mixed with the film's captivating presentation of Christian spirituality take viewers to a place that few movies dare to travel. The country's premier film society ought to reward this type of artistic risk-taking, not shun it.

Without seeking to rehash much of the controversy that surrounded the film during its release, "Passion" deserves appreciation for its individuality and courage in tackling often overlooked details about the life of Jesus Christ and the factors that contributed to his martyrdom.

Not only did the movie offer an unapologetic view of Christ's violent death, but it also sparked much-needed dialogue in our society about religion and the role human beings play in the universe.

Criticism of the film stems largely from its violence and the unfair interpretation that "Passion" is nothing more than Christian propaganda meant to proselytize hell-bound infidels. As someone who despises just about every form of religious indoctrination and the arrogance of mass-conversion programs, "Passion" offered me a testament of Christian faith that had the pleasantry of not coming to my door or handing me an unwanted advertisement of why I need to join a particular religious movement.

Instead, the film showcases a popular interpretation of Christ's final hours and execution while also integrating many of the more significant moments of Christ's life into the film. But this alone does not warrant an Oscar nod.

"Passion" also pulled no punches in its detail of the physical abuse Christ endured before and during his crucifixion. Whether religious or secular, a film that so honestly depicts the severity of humanity's capacity for aggression deserves our gratitude. Too often art shields its viewers from the reality of man's cruelty to his fellow man.

Further, "Passion" stirs discussion about how revolutionary thinkers frequently find themselves punished by the society they challenge. "Passion" is as much a story of intellectual intolerance as it is a story of the love between mother and son. The film doesn't simply tell of the story of Jesus, it serves as a challenge to think more deeply about what constitutes crime and how even the most revered thinkers can be turned into scapegoats.

Whatever the personal reasons for going out to the theaters to watch "Passion," the general public was clearly interested in this film. Grossing $604 million worldwide, "Passion" showed masses of moviegoers one of the defining events of human civilization while also beginning an academic and spiritual discourse about some of mankind's greatest questions -- such as what, if anything, is the purpose of human existence.

Gibson's "Passion" was as artistic as it was popular. I see no possible explanation for its exclusion from the best picture category except for the inherent fear of religious controversy by the 5,800 Oscar voters.

Essentially, I find it more than a little troubling that our society's biggest award show values the story of Ray Charles' life over the artistic presentation of Jesus Christ's death.

Macy Hanson is a political science and philosophy sophomore.

Email the Editor