Mel Gibson’s “Resurrection of the Christ” Will Be Split Into 2 Parts, Released 40 Days Apart in 2027

Gibson, 69, has spoken vaguely about the sequel over the years, and in 2016 told Stephen Colbert, "It’s more than [the] single event [in the title], it’s an amazing event ... and to underpin that with the things around it is really the story. To sort of enlighten what that means."

Six years later, in 2022, he talked about the challenges of figuring out the film's time frame. "It’s a huge subject, and it’s not a linear narrative," he told Raymond Arroyo, host of EWTN's The World Over, in April 2022. "You have to juxtapose the central event that I’m trying to tell with everything else around it in the future, in the past, and in other realms, and that’s kind of getting a little sci-fi out there."

Later that same year, Gibson spoke with Jenni Falconer about the project and revealed he had two scripts. “One is very structured and the other is like an acid trip because you're going into other realms," he shared in their October 2022 conversation," adding, "You're in hell. You're watching the angels fall. It's crazy."

In March 2025, Variety reported that the films were set to begin production this month at Cinecittà Studios in Rome, citing comments CEO Manuela Cacciamani gave to Italian financial newspaper Il Sole 24 Ore.

The sequel will also film in rural locations throughout Southern Italy, including Altamura, Ginosa, Gravina di Laterza and Matera.

Jim Caviezel, who starred as Jesus Christ will return alongside Monica Bellucci who starred as Mary Magdalene. Maia Morgenstern, who played Jesus' mother in The Passion of the Christ, and Francesco De Vito, who portrayed Peter, have also signed on for the sequel, per IMDb.

“There are things that I cannot say that will shock the audience,” Caviezel told USA Today in April 2018. “It’s great. The film [Gibson is] going to be the biggest film in history. It’s that good.”

The Passion of the Christ broke records upon its release 21 years ago, becoming the fifth-highest-grossing movie of 2004 worldwide. And it is the second all-time highest-grossing R-rated film in North America behind 2024's Deadpool & Wolverine.

It received Oscar nominations for Best Cinematography, Best Original Score and Best Makeup at the 77th Academy Awards in 2005, but did not take home any trophies.

The Resurrection of the Christ part 1 will premiere on March 26, 2027, and part 2 will premiere on Thursday, May 6, 2027. The original film is available to stream on Netflix.

Already been done:

R2 😂 I forgot how fucking silly Family Guy is. Too funny.

Isn't 57 year old Jim Caviezel a bit old, to be playing Jesus?

"THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST" was snubbed big time by the Academy back in the day despite being well-made and a blockbuster at the box-office.

Granted, it was nominated for Best Score, Cinematography, and Makeup, but it also deserved nods for Best Picture, Director (Gibson), Actor (Jim Caviezel as 'Jesus'), Supporting Actress (Maia Morgenstern as his mother 'Mary'), Screenplay, Production Design, Costumes, Sound, and Editing.

The film was a major event in the spring of 2004 and became the 5th highest-grossing movie of the year.

The dialog was even in Latin, Hebrew, and Aramaic, instead of having the characters just speak English.

If it had been about any other religion, they would have showered it with nominations and a few wins.

None of the Best Picture nominees ("MILLION DOLLAR BABY," "THE AVIATOR," "FINDING NEVERLAND," "RAY," "SIDEWAYS") were among the Top 10 grossers of 2004.

Will the sequels also be anti semetic? Jim Cavaziel seemed to think he actually was Jesus after the first movie.

R6. No shit? That's crazy.

The Passion of the Christ was the true successor to The Exorcist. Not in message, but in method. It was a horror film that used religion for shock value and triggered the same hype and hysteria The Exorcist did in the 1970s.

But at least The Exorcist was honest about being horror. Mel Gibson disguised The Passion as a spiritual experience and “serious art,” which was pure nonsense. It was a 1970s exploitation film dressed up for the Bush era and somehow, it worked.

And it worked because the U.S. in the early 2000s still had puritan walls to knock down. People were still debating Britney Spears’ virginity. This film didn’t challenge the culture, it weaponized it.

As for the sequel? Most people barely remember the first film. So Gibson and Caviezel are going to have to rile up the MAGA base with rage-bait marketing just to sell tickets. Expect a political circus. The movie won’t go viral, but the culture war campaign will.

I remember enjoying Betty Butterfield's review of the original.

And to add to my R8 post:

Guarantee this Passion sequel becomes a full-blown culture war flashpoint. The marketing will center around one message: “Conservatives are the best consumers.”

Sydney Sweeney’s American Eagle ad isn’t just a coincidence, it’s part of a broader pivot. Major brands are quietly backing away from Pride Month and leaning into red-state optics. Caviezel knows the environment is ripe. Sound of Freedom already proved you can weaponize persecution narratives and outrage-clicks into ticket sales.

This sequel isn’t just a film—it’s a political move. A Christian epic for the MAGA base, dropping in a Trump-era election year, engineered to “prove” that conservative messaging can outperform liberal Hollywood at the box office.

Which is deeply ironic because the right has spent decades claiming to hate Hollywood. Now they’re desperate to hijack it.

It’s not about faith. It’s not about art. It’s about control and cashing in.

I thought Jesus had red hair and blue eyes?

Although Caviezel is a nutcase he was so hot back then. I take pleasure in thinking about the things he did that made him turn into a Christian nut. There’s always something.

But does Jesus finally show peen?

[quote] Isn't 57 year old Jim Caviezel a bit old, to be playing Jesus?

From Collider.com:

[quote] Now 56, Caviezel will be digitally de-aged to portray Christ at 33, using the same kind of tech pioneered in films like The Irishman, although ideally with less awkward scenes of very old people having to walk like younger men. “Twenty years ago is supposed to be three days later,” Gibson told Joe Rogan last year. “So it has its own peculiar set of problems, which I think I can solve.”

Both parts will be massive hits.

Mel Gibson sure knows how to milk cash from the Jesus crowd.

I saw his first Passion of the Christ, just to see what the fuss was all about. It was Jesus porn.

“ And it is the second all-time highest-grossing R-rated film in North America behind 2024's Deadpool & Wolverine.” 😎

They used de-aging technology on Harrison Ford in 2023 for the Indian Jones film, but it was only for a few scenes in the movie (see link for what it looked like in the movie). It is supposed to be a very expensive process which will have to be done over two movies for the Passion sequels.

What r8 / r10 said

Were any of you fans of Person of Interest?

Jesus/MAGA/conservatives will not be popular in 2027, when the US is fully in the throes of a Trump Depression. This will be a giant flop.

R20 Well someone might beat them to it by then!

R14 They’d have to de-age Monica Bellucci too, she’s 60 now! I doubt the Virgin Mary had puffy cosmetic work done.

[quote] "THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST" was snubbed big time by the Academy back in the day despite being well-made and a blockbuster at the box-office.

I actually thought it was a very well made film.

True to the text, and authentic.

I know that many disagree with the content, but the movie itself was top notch.

[quote] The Passion of the Christ was the true successor to The Exorcist. Not in message, but in method. It was a horror film that used religion for shock value and triggered the same hype and hysteria The Exorcist did in the 1970s.

[quote] But at least The Exorcist was honest about being horror. Mel Gibson disguised The Passion as a spiritual experience and “serious art,” which was pure nonsense.

I totally disagree.

What Gibson portrayed in the movie, was taken directly from accounts in the Bible.

It WAS that graphic, and it was SUPPOSED to be that graphic.

I'm guessing that you're not a big believer in the Bible, which is why you regard the events depicted as "fiction" and "horror."

However, Christians believe that the accounts in the Bible are true and factual, and thus, so were the accounts of the life and death of Jesus.

It's no different from other religions that believe in the accounts of Buddha, or Mohammed, or whatever.

So I think for you to simply dismiss the movie as part of a "horror genre," is pretty simplistic.

I watched Person of Interest, not the entire run but the last year or two when it got really complicated. After being the lead in the beginning, Caviezel became the least interesting character. Finch, Miss Shaw and Root took over.

R23 You don’t have to literally believe in the Bible to know that Passion of the Christ is not a fucking horror movie. That person is just a jackass.

Sorry Jesus Christ.

Will Sugartits play Mary?

It will need gay porn scenes to win over this crowd.

Jesus must have well defined cum gutters to get DLers to watch this mess.

Jim Caviezel is a gorgeous man.

Hot damn!

The sequel I'm waiting for is "The Resurrection of Brian."

[quote]The long-awaited sequel

"Long awaited"? By who? Snuff film enthusiasts?

Jim Caviezel's wife is quite mannish.

He's way out of her league.

R31 You do realize that Passion of the Christ is one of the highest grossing films of all time.

Jim married an ugly woman and has adopted kids. He supposedly abused a dog on the set of Person of Interest. Not a good person.

Will there be dong?

The Christ looks sad!

[quote] Jim married an ugly woman and has adopted kids

There were always rumors about him being a very, very deep closet case.

Is that why he's a religious nut?

The new Wicked.

Isn’t it time for Mel to start taking his Lithium?

r33, let's not get carried away. TPOTC was the third highest grossing film of 2004, after Shrek 2 and Spider-Man 2.

R40 I realize I typed too fast. I meant to say independent film. Any film that grosses over 500 mil especially in the aughts before super inflation is a damn popular flick though.

I believe in fire and snakes, R23. Not any less credible than your little myth.