I recently rewatched "The Passion of the Christ." I first saw it three years ago, and this last time I saw it marks the third time. First of, as a Protestant who actually seems to give a crap about their theology and the teachings of the bible rather than what my self-induced schizophrenic ideas of God "talking" to me, or my feelings, dictate, I would condemn the movie for breaking the 2nd Commandment. As Catholics, and some Lutherans and Episcopalians quite illogically do not count the 2nd Commandment as a commandment, the movie would not be seen as such by those denominations. However, that is my only condemnation of what is otherwise one of the most powerful and moving films I have ever seen. Unlike many films, such as the famous "Jesus" movie which, despite Gary Oldman's performance as Pilate, can best be described as pathetic, the film realistically depicts Christ through the three days of his torture and death, and some of what he taught beforehand. Unlike "Jesus" which depicts Satan as something resembling a lawyer (ironically funny as that is) and shows the Christ on the Cross as someone who has come down with severe diarrhea, not someone experiencing possibly one of the worst deaths ever conceived.
The story itself is rather simple. Christ is arrested, beaten, tortured, condemned, tortured again, and finally crucified. The film is entirely in Aramaic, Hebrew, and Latin, there is no English spoken. This, and the costumes and casting, gives a more realistic feel to the movie, lending it authenticity instead of feeling like you're at a Bible-themed Disney World (again, a complaint I have about most movies depicting Christ.)Instead of Satan the lawyer, Satan is a sexually ambiguous figure, depicted by a woman and voiced by a man. While he does not look feminine, he does not look masculine either. The end effect of Satan, especially in his temptation of Christ, is to instill a sense of dread and terror into the viewers. Christ is played by James Caviezel, and is not some gentle voiced surfer dude, nor some nice man telling us all to be nice, but is a relatively ordinary man, throughout the movie becoming more and more beaten until by the crucifixion there is more skin off his body than on it. Mel Gibson being Catholic, there is a bit of Catholicism throughout the movie, with Veronica's veil and attention given to Mary the Mother of Christ. The Catholicism is not over the top however, which is more than I can say for the "castrated Christianity" put forth in most movies about Christ.
There are two popular criticisms of the movie; violence and anti-Semitism. The first is easily addressed. The movie is about Christ's death. It is His death that saved His people, not his life and teachings. His death, bloody, painful, and cruel, was necessary for their to be Salvation. The movie is called "The PASSION of the Christ." If you are going to see a movie about Christ's passion and death, shut up about it being violent. The Romans were not nice people, they did not kill cleanly. Christ was not spanked, he was scourged, and that would have flayed him. It was unheard of for a man to survive a Roman flogging. He was not duct-taped to the cross, despite what I saw in a pentecostal church's "Good Friday Service," IE, Passion Play, he was nailed to the cross. That would make you bleed. The thorns on Christ's brow would have made him bloody as anything. Christ's death was violent and bloody, "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed." (Isaiah 53:5) Not "by his moderate discomfort." Christians too often think that their faith is sanitized, and that God is "nice." The Passion does a good job of reminding us that God is not "nice," he is not "safe" and the price of our salvation was bloody death and suffering. It is not a "2-hour snuff film" as David Edelstein of "Slate Magazine" accused it of being. It is simply an accurate representation of what Christ physically went through. The only "problem" I have is that it does not depict the true agony of Christ's sacrifice, the separation Christ suffered from God the Father and the Spirit. However, no film could actually depict this agony, as film is a visual medium, and no human can even begin to fathom the true suffering of Christ in that way. I would praise it for not showing "the Harrowing of Hell" or of Christ literally descending into hell, which slightly satisfies the part of me that doesn't rely on 8th Century Catholic teaching for my doctrine.
The second accusation is that the movie is anti-Semitic. That argument is, with all disrespect meant, bollocks. Yes, the Romans did the actual act of crucifying Christ. Everything else falls on the heads of the Jews. The Priests and the Pharisees killed Christ. To say anything else, to represent anything else, would be a lie. The High Priest Caiaphas admitted as much, and called judgement on himself, calling "His blood be upon us and our children." Throughout Biblical history, the Jews had broken Covenant with God again, and again, and again. The murder of Christ was the final straw, the disbanding of their Covenant. They DID commit Deicide. True enough, Christ died for all our sins, but that doesn't mean that all the guilt is equal. Indeed, the guilt of the Jews is more, because they broke Covenant, they KNEW who Christ was, and they were too blind and too proud to admit it, thinking it better to have him murdered. Anti-Semitism as a result of the Jewish murder of Christ is not fair, right, or merited. However, it is wrong to contradict truth for the sake of political correctness. The movie does not rely on Jewish stereotypes, it simply depicts the Jews as they were; evil, power hungry, conniving, and corrupt. If you didn't get that impression based on the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles, than go back and actually read your Bible. The Priests and Pharisees were slime, and the movie depicts that simply and accurately.
The Passion is indeed a violent movie. It is bloody and cruel. Honestly, it made me cry, especially in the knowledge that it was my, as well as every Christian's, sin that sent Christ to the cross. It is humbling, if that modest word can accurately describe it, to realize that Christ went through such physical torture, and worse spiritual torture, to save His people. Of course, the Protestant in me objects to any depiction of God, Father, Son, or Holy Ghost, but if that is laid aside, then the film is almost flawless. I give it five stars out of five.
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is one movie I'll probably never, because I disagree with it ever having needed to be made in the first place. Sure, the Romans were some violent, violent people, and sure, what happened to Jesus was absolutely brutal, and sure, it'll DEFINITELY wake up those "Christian" viewers who "never thought about it that way"; but most will see it as Mel Gibson satisfying his appetite for boundless gore. I don't want to see a man getting flogged until his skin flies across the screen. I don't want to see close-ups of iron nails going through hands and feet. I don't want to see a spear thrust into a person's side and wrenched out again. You see movie torture like this only in films like Hostel for a reason.
ReplyDelete"I'll probably never see...."
ReplyDeleteGoodness I can't type today...