Monday, March 15, 2004
The Passion
Hello again. This weekend I finally went to see The Passion of the Christ. I had a lot to say about it on Saturday, then on Sunday I thought better of writing anything... so today I think I will say a little and compromise.
First of all, I did not like the movie. I do not understand why the film was defended as being historical and accurate, and yet Mr. Gibson took some license with the events. I think the sycophantic praise that ministers are giving him for his "bravery" in making the movie is also misdirected. The movie itself tells very little that is shocking. He barely represents the resurrection, and the only miracle that is performed on-screen is one of potentially apocryphal nature. The movie says very little about Christ's ministry, and the only controversy is in whether all this happened or not.
True bravery would have been depicting Christ's ministry; the way he got in the face of the attitudes of the day. His challenging sermons and passionate relationships were far more intriguing than his public execution. If Mr. Gibson would have liked to raise eyebrows, he could have shown more of the resurrection, which is the cornerstone of the Jesus story. As is, you almost wonder if it really happened in the movie or if it was allegorical. The majority of the movie's preaching comes through Pilate and his wife, and the message is not 'love' (the greatest commandment), but 'truth' (which is the rallying cry of humanism).
A lot has been said about the violence. I think it was over done. The word on the street is that the movie finally shows it the way it happened. The truth is, it isn't. Afterall, this is a movie. Movies survive or die based on emotions it can evoke. The camera slows down gut wrenching scenes to make an impact, and sorrowful music plays in the background. The violent confrontations are filmed with crisp, exciting editing, and the sounds of beating are all included quite loudly. In real life, all of this would happen at one speed, sans music. I did not expect any different, but I have never been a fan of emotional puppeteering when it comes to religious messages. If there is truth, it will have an impact. One does not need to be "fluffed" for the punchline.
I did cry during the movie. It was hard not to. But it was because the music and camera were working in unison with the story to create a particular atmosphere. It wasn't an epiphany; it was a reaction. I have the same reaction in many other movies with no religious connotation.
Furthermore, I feel that Mr. Gibson treated Judas poorly, used the image of Satan inappropriately, made Herod into a fopp, added unnecessary symbolism, failed to make the reason for Jesus' martyrdom become clear, dealt far too long with scenes that were not even in the majority of the Gospel accounts (the man whose ear is cut off, and the man carrying Christ's cross), and failed to convince us that Jesus was really God's son.
The movie failed to ignite any sort of zeal in my spirit, and I left feeling the same way as I have in months past; unsure if I will ever be able to truly grasp the depth and width of this man we call Jesus. A friend of mine, Nate, said it was the best Jesus movie of all time. I think he is right, but I think that also shows us how superficial and cliche or treatments of this man have been.
To end on the positive note, I want to say two things. First of all, the movie will have something in it for everyone to think about. All of us will focus on one aspect or another, and take time to think it through. With me, I asked myself 'why was Judas needed to betray Jesus?' My question found an answer as the movie unfolded. The movie did a good job exposing the political relationships between the Romans and the Pharisees.
Lastly, the movie excelled in one important aspect; it made Jesus human. The thing we forget all too often is that while he was God, he was also a human being. The scenes of him praying in the Garden show his fear, and the flashbacks concerning Mary's reflections on Jesus' boyhood are amazingly poignant.
My friend Paul, who is a minister, and a saint that I admire, said that he felt this was not a good evangelistic movie. I agree wholeheartedly. If you do see it, you will have plenty to think about. You may want to spend some time with the Bible before and/or after, however, to answer some questions that the movie will inevitably raise.
Have a great day!
First of all, I did not like the movie. I do not understand why the film was defended as being historical and accurate, and yet Mr. Gibson took some license with the events. I think the sycophantic praise that ministers are giving him for his "bravery" in making the movie is also misdirected. The movie itself tells very little that is shocking. He barely represents the resurrection, and the only miracle that is performed on-screen is one of potentially apocryphal nature. The movie says very little about Christ's ministry, and the only controversy is in whether all this happened or not.
True bravery would have been depicting Christ's ministry; the way he got in the face of the attitudes of the day. His challenging sermons and passionate relationships were far more intriguing than his public execution. If Mr. Gibson would have liked to raise eyebrows, he could have shown more of the resurrection, which is the cornerstone of the Jesus story. As is, you almost wonder if it really happened in the movie or if it was allegorical. The majority of the movie's preaching comes through Pilate and his wife, and the message is not 'love' (the greatest commandment), but 'truth' (which is the rallying cry of humanism).
A lot has been said about the violence. I think it was over done. The word on the street is that the movie finally shows it the way it happened. The truth is, it isn't. Afterall, this is a movie. Movies survive or die based on emotions it can evoke. The camera slows down gut wrenching scenes to make an impact, and sorrowful music plays in the background. The violent confrontations are filmed with crisp, exciting editing, and the sounds of beating are all included quite loudly. In real life, all of this would happen at one speed, sans music. I did not expect any different, but I have never been a fan of emotional puppeteering when it comes to religious messages. If there is truth, it will have an impact. One does not need to be "fluffed" for the punchline.
I did cry during the movie. It was hard not to. But it was because the music and camera were working in unison with the story to create a particular atmosphere. It wasn't an epiphany; it was a reaction. I have the same reaction in many other movies with no religious connotation.
Furthermore, I feel that Mr. Gibson treated Judas poorly, used the image of Satan inappropriately, made Herod into a fopp, added unnecessary symbolism, failed to make the reason for Jesus' martyrdom become clear, dealt far too long with scenes that were not even in the majority of the Gospel accounts (the man whose ear is cut off, and the man carrying Christ's cross), and failed to convince us that Jesus was really God's son.
The movie failed to ignite any sort of zeal in my spirit, and I left feeling the same way as I have in months past; unsure if I will ever be able to truly grasp the depth and width of this man we call Jesus. A friend of mine, Nate, said it was the best Jesus movie of all time. I think he is right, but I think that also shows us how superficial and cliche or treatments of this man have been.
To end on the positive note, I want to say two things. First of all, the movie will have something in it for everyone to think about. All of us will focus on one aspect or another, and take time to think it through. With me, I asked myself 'why was Judas needed to betray Jesus?' My question found an answer as the movie unfolded. The movie did a good job exposing the political relationships between the Romans and the Pharisees.
Lastly, the movie excelled in one important aspect; it made Jesus human. The thing we forget all too often is that while he was God, he was also a human being. The scenes of him praying in the Garden show his fear, and the flashbacks concerning Mary's reflections on Jesus' boyhood are amazingly poignant.
My friend Paul, who is a minister, and a saint that I admire, said that he felt this was not a good evangelistic movie. I agree wholeheartedly. If you do see it, you will have plenty to think about. You may want to spend some time with the Bible before and/or after, however, to answer some questions that the movie will inevitably raise.
Have a great day!
Comments:
Post a Comment