[5] The realism and tragedy of the scene are enhanced by the perspective, which foreshortens and dramatizes the recumbent figure, stressing the anatomical details, as well as the holes in Christ's hands and feet and the faces of the three mourners.

[6] One of the piece's most distinctive features is the severe angle of the composition, which, when displayed at eye level, places the theoretical viewer at the feet of the dramatically foreshortened figure.

[9] There are several theories about the reason for this apparent discrepancy.The composition does not fully adhere to the rules of linear perspective, so there is no upright vantage point from which the figure is foreshortened 'correctly.'

This has led to Paul Kristeller speculate that the painting is a study in foreshortening as seen from below, due to the similarities between the proportions of the laying Christ and the putti and other figures in the circular trompe-l'œil in the Camera degli Sposi.

John Ward proposed that the discrepancy in proportions may not have been visible to the artist, who was transcribing his perception of multiple planes onto a two-dimensional canvas, such that every part of the figure's body remains the focal point to a scanning eye.

[8] John White referred to Mantegna as a "protagonist of theoretical perspective," and German scholar Hans Jantzen proposed that the impossible vantage point creates drama and expressiveness rather than technical accuracy.

Being placed at eye level at Christ’s feet, directly in front of his open wounds, invites the viewers to remember the reason for his death.

The idea of scherzo, a musical term referring to the lighthearted, playful segment of a symphony, is present in this scene,[14] invoking slight lightness, hope, and promise in anticipation of Christ's future resurrection.

This has led some art historians, such as Roberto Longhi and Ettore Camesasca, to categorize the piece as one of Mantegna's later works, while others, namely Henry Thode and Paul Kristeller, date it earlier in his career.

[19] The painting may have been rejected by its original patron, possibly Ercole d'Este,[20] for its jarring intensity, or because the angle and composition of the piece broke too much with convention for a lamentation scene.