| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| The Movie "Passion of the Christ" Now Showing Abroad |
| 2004-04-04 |
| The movie has opened in Syria, Jordan and Lebanon - but not in Israel. .... The film opened in France this week, as commentators warned it could add to a recent wave of anti-Semitic feeling in the country. .... Vatican officials have praised the film, with the movie due to open on 7 April in Italy. .... The film is also due to open in Russia on Tuesday. It has already proven to be a box-office hit in the UK and the US, where it may soon become the biggest film in US cinema history. Many critics have complained that the movie blames primarily Jews for Jesus’ arrest and execution. That’s certainly true about the film, but it’s also true about the New Testament. I myself am not very concerned about that aspect of the film. After all, the film also shows the Romans as the worst torturers and shows Jews as Jesus’ family and disciples. I would condemn the film for a failure to present a clear and coherent explanation of why Jesus was arrested, tortured and executed. The film is so muddled about that question that we can hardly address (what should be) the next question of whether that explanation is true. On the other hand, I praise the film for its cinematic virtuosity in depicting Jesus’ physical suffering, which I think was a major intention of the film’s creators. This aspect of the film will make a huge mental impact on all viewers. This film will significantly affect the way that people in our time think about Jesus. The mental image of Jesus as the holy moral teacher has been eclipsed by an image of Jesus as a human courageous martyr. That said, I now want to point out the moment that, I think, the film’s creators intended to deliver the film’s main lesson. I found this incident to be a brilliant yet subtle element that I wish other viewers understand as I did. Although Jesus is already dying because of the tortures, he is forced to drag his cross a long way to the execution site. He collapses several times, and each time the soldiers and bystanders beat Jesus to make him stand up and continue. Eventually a Roman officer orders his soldiers to make a bystander help Jesus drag the cross the rest of the way. The soldiers then do pick a tall, strong man (Simon of Cyrene) out of the crowd and tell him to help. The tall man tries to talk his way out of the order, complaining that he is just passing through and knows nothing and has nothing to do with the events, but the soldiers nevertheless compel him to help. The procession to the execution site then continues for a while, and gradually the tall man sympathizes and even admires Jesus for the endured suffering. After a while Jesus collapses again, and the soldiers and bystanders again begin beating him. The tall man watches for a moment and then swings his hands at the attackers to make them stop and move back. He then yells (something like): "Stop beating him. If you keep hitting him, then I’ll stop helping here; I don’t care what you do to me!" That statement is (as I recall) immediately followed by a very brief flashback of Jesus reciting his beatitudes in his Sermon on the Mount. Simon of Cyrene is a uninformed, unengaged, ordinary, cowardly man who does not realize his own strength and moral instinct. Unexpectedly placed into a dangerous situation where he might exercise that strength and instinct to defend a doomed stranger against many dangerous attackers, he is inspired by Jesus’ suffering to risk his own safety. On one hand, his threat is: "I’ll stop helping here." On the other hand, though, his defiance is brave: "I don’t care what you do to me." A positive message that I thus took from this very brutal film is that, like Simon of Cyrene, we too should feel encouraged by Jesus’ suffering to do even small good deeds when crucial moments occur in our own always confused and sometimes frightening lives. |
| Posted by:Mike Sylwester |
| #10 I wonder why Gibson chose to focus only on the Passion. I got the impression that this movie was meant to be a rebuke or chastisement, or maybe just a reminder, to Christians who mouth the words and go through the motions without really considering the "historical" implications.* We see bumper stickers and t-shirts bearing vapid expressions like "Jesus is Awesome!" and we hear people all the time saying Jesus died for our sins. I think this movie was Gibson's way of saying, "Um, guys? I don't think you fully understand just what that involved." An attempt to get Christians (In Name Only?) to shake off the passive, rah-rah attitude of cheering for Jesus as if he was the local sports team, and to contemplate what he endured - and, with honest appraisal of one's own life, whether it was worth it. I think the Jews vs. the Romans hoopla is a red herring. The point isn't who did what or why. The point is: This is how bad it was. This is what was done. For you. Are you worthy of it? If there is an accusation in this movie, it's not directed at the Jews, but at those who claim to follow Jesus. Just my $.02. * I used quotes because there is, obviously, dispute as to the historical validity of the subject matter. I mean no offense. |
| Posted by: BH 2004-04-04 11:11:18 PM |
| #9 Someone made a point on another thread that he saw the movie in Qatar. The muslims were crying, but just maybe some might start thinking about the message - Love they enemy. |
| Posted by: Anonymous2U 2004-04-04 7:44:47 PM |
| #8 Jen, true. But they weren't executed with Jesus at the same time. This shows that Rome didn't care about the 'Jesus movement' at that time. It wasn't a threat. They saw it as a squabble between Jews. Just to be clear, I too think that this who killed Jesus debate is a non-issue. Anyone bringing it up usually has their own anti-semitic baggage. |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-04-04 7:35:52 PM |
| #7 I'm going to see it this week - before Easter. BTW the hand that nails the first nail belongs to Mel Gibson - indicating that it wasn't the Joooos who killed Jesus - we all did, and, as noted above, it was pre-ordained. No guilt or blame is appropriate, just thanks |
| Posted by: Frank G 2004-04-04 7:06:07 PM |
| #6 Rafe, most, if not all of the apostles were executed by the Romans. Martyred for the Faith like St. Paul and St. Peter. In fact, I'd never heard the word "martyr" used for anyone but Christians who had given their life for the Faith until 9/11. |
| Posted by: Jen 2004-04-04 6:57:37 PM |
| #5 I don't think the film was anti-semitic at all. Jesus was a jew after all, the pharisees (who were also jews) wanted him dead and got Pontius P. to sign off on it. Pretty easy to assimilate for anyone w/half a brain. Much hoopla over nothing imo. |
| Posted by: Jarhead 2004-04-04 6:53:24 PM |
| #4 I don't get all the hoopla is about,it does not matter if the Romans killed him or the Jews or little Green Men from Mars he was going to die anyway it was pre-ordained. |
| Posted by: djohn66 2004-04-04 6:43:25 PM |
| #3 Right you are Rafe. Rome crucified Christ not the Jews. |
| Posted by: Raptor 2004-04-04 4:50:44 PM |
| #2 I wonder why Gibson chose to focus only on the Passion. Could it be because this was the only place in Christ's story where he could inject typical Hollywood violence to make the film sell? Does he mention anywhere in the film why Jesus was so hated by some and was crucified? The issue of placing blame on the Jews for Jesus' crucifixion is historically irrelevant. If the Romans considered Jesus politically dangerous to them, they would have killed all the apostles as well. That's common knowledge. Blaming the Jews however, is just being theologically ignorant (as well as being ignorant of the Bible). |
| Posted by: Rafael 2004-04-04 4:12:17 PM |
| #1 What is it with these reporters and the biggest movie of all time crap. It won't even get close to Titanic. The only reason I bring it up is it just shows how bad reporters are in general and how you should not believe everything you read. |
| Posted by: Ol_Dirty_American 2004-04-04 10:31:00 AM |