Lothaire Bluteau is Daniel, a mousy actor who is drawn into a new version of The Passion play- the crucifixion of Christ. The local priest wants to freshen it up a bit, and Daniel brings in a small cast to reenact the scenes and play all the parts. In addition to two veteran actors, he brings onboard Constance (Johanne-Marie Tremblay), who happens to be sleeping with the aforementioned priest. He also finds the absolutely gorgeous Mireille (Catherine Wilkening), a Parisian model who uses her body in commercials to sell products. Already the parallels between Daniel and the actual Jesus Christ are hinted at, as the actor travels and assembles his "apostles." The troupe rewrites The Passion, opening it up to include recent revisionist history, and the play is performed to an awestruck audience- then the trouble begins. The priest did not want THAT kind of updating, complete with nudity and the suggestion that Jesus was the son of a Roman soldier, not God. Daniel attends an audition for a beer ad with Mireille, and after seeing her humiliated in the name of a cheap beer, he destroys the television equipment. He is later arrested, while hanging on the cross in the play, and booked. His lawyer is not a criminal lawyer, but an entertainment lawyer who would love to further Daniel's career. As secular forces begin to affect the play's cast, the troupe decides to give one last performance despite the priest's ban. In a rather silly fight, Daniel is injured, and the various reactions at his two different hospital visits also shows similarities to his greatest role.
My main complaint here is not the obvious- that some film makers strayed from the Gospel to tell Jesus' story. It is the fact that the film makers try to equate theater with church, which have more differences than similarities. I minored in Communication Arts in college, appeared in my fair share of stage productions and local television commercials. However, as Arcand takes a rather hammer-headed approach to theater as church, he forgets that church is a matter of faith and belief, not a matter of free speech. One can argue that church can be theatrical, but that cannot be reversed to mean the theater is church. The entire film shut itself off to the FAITH of Christianity. The priest dismisses his flock as people who cannot afford psychoanalysis, so they confess their sins to him instead. This might be true for some, but definitely not for all, but you would not know that here. I once read an interesting statement about faith: "Truth is stranger than reason." This film will not convince the faithful to lose their beliefs. It is better when it shows the crass commercialism and emptiness of many people's lives. Seeing the critics say the same things after the performances of two entirely different plays spoke more than the priest's obvious "people are gullible" scene. He wants The Passion play changed because of pressure from higher up in the church bureaucracy, not because it defiles his beliefs. The film makers even come up with a way for the actor to heal the sick, but that also seems convenient. I liked the cast and direction, but the film's avoidance of faith- is something I could not overcome.
My main complaint here is not the obvious- that some film makers strayed from the Gospel to tell Jesus' story. It is the fact that the film makers try to equate theater with church, which have more differences than similarities. I minored in Communication Arts in college, appeared in my fair share of stage productions and local television commercials. However, as Arcand takes a rather hammer-headed approach to theater as church, he forgets that church is a matter of faith and belief, not a matter of free speech. One can argue that church can be theatrical, but that cannot be reversed to mean the theater is church. The entire film shut itself off to the FAITH of Christianity. The priest dismisses his flock as people who cannot afford psychoanalysis, so they confess their sins to him instead. This might be true for some, but definitely not for all, but you would not know that here. I once read an interesting statement about faith: "Truth is stranger than reason." This film will not convince the faithful to lose their beliefs. It is better when it shows the crass commercialism and emptiness of many people's lives. Seeing the critics say the same things after the performances of two entirely different plays spoke more than the priest's obvious "people are gullible" scene. He wants The Passion play changed because of pressure from higher up in the church bureaucracy, not because it defiles his beliefs. The film makers even come up with a way for the actor to heal the sick, but that also seems convenient. I liked the cast and direction, but the film's avoidance of faith- is something I could not overcome.