Sunday, March 27, 2005
kef1000blog
kef1000blog
“The Passion of the Christ”
The controversy over whether Mel Gibson’s movie, The Passion of the Christ, should win Best Picture credits is seen by many Christians as just one more example of an ongoing cultural war being fought in America between believers and a godless Hollywood. It is unfortunate that Christians have invested so much energy in their support for this film. The movie should be judged by Hollywood’s standards for a Hollywood honor. The fact that it is about our Lord and Savior doesn’t mean that Christians must prefer it over other films. It may be the best film released last year. But if it doesn’t win that doesn’t automatically mean that it was discriminated against because of its subject matter.
I found the movie to be excessively violent, steeped in mysticism, expressing a proclivity for the cult of the Virgin Mary, and lacking a firm Scriptural base.
The cinematic violence began with the beatings of Jesus at his arrest. The bridge scene was particularly outrageous. But we read in Matthew that the only violence recorded was Peter’s use of a sword on the ear of a servant of the high priest. Jesus immediately reprimanded Peter and corrected the problem (as one would expect from a man of peace). Not only that, but John tells us that those sent to arrest Jesus weren’t sure what they were getting into. He says that when Jesus identified himself “they drew back and fell to the ground;” hardly the eager to strike bullies depicted in the film. Furthermore, Mark quotes Jesus as asking, “Am I leading a rebellion that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me?” This indicates a willingness to go peaceably which the text leads one to believe he did. In fact, according to John, the first instance of violence directed toward our Lord occurred when an official didn’t like what he perceived as insolence on the part of Jesus in answering a question put by the high priest. We are told that he “struck him in the face.” Certainly this would not have been noted if Jesus had received the treatment shown in the movie.
The Gospel writers make it clear that Jesus was beaten, mocked, spit upon, flogged, and ultimately crucified for our sins. But the movie takes liberties even with this. For instance, during the flogging Jesus is depicted as being almost out when suddenly he rises to his feet in a momentary bit of defiance. Rather than causing one to empathize with the Son of the Living God, one feels like one is watching Rocky Balboa in a late round of a championship fight. But Jesus is quickly beaten down again and the blood continues to flow. Indeed, seemingly gallons of red are splattered everywhere during the movie.
If one didn’t already know the story, one would be inclined to view it as a mystical journey quite beyond understanding. The movie continuously highlights strange looking characters that seem menacing; one guesses that they are supposed to be Satan and his minions. But treating the devil as a space alien adds nothing to the film and detracts from the truth that Satan was being defeated by the very events being depicted.
I was also struck by the constant attention paid to Mary throughout the movie. Numerous cameos and a constant presence gave the impression that the movie was as much about her as it was about him. No doubt Mel Gibson’s Catholicism spilled into the movie. Any true depiction of the passion of Christ should properly concentrate on him and his suffering. It is too bad that the emphasis on Mary is allowed to detract from the central story.
It is perhaps a sign that American Christians feel besieged in a culture gone haywire that so many have boiled down the question of the merits of this movie to a simple equation: us verses them. It doesn’t need to be that way. Christians may disagree on the quality of the film and certainly non-Christians may also.
“The Passion of the Christ”
The controversy over whether Mel Gibson’s movie, The Passion of the Christ, should win Best Picture credits is seen by many Christians as just one more example of an ongoing cultural war being fought in America between believers and a godless Hollywood. It is unfortunate that Christians have invested so much energy in their support for this film. The movie should be judged by Hollywood’s standards for a Hollywood honor. The fact that it is about our Lord and Savior doesn’t mean that Christians must prefer it over other films. It may be the best film released last year. But if it doesn’t win that doesn’t automatically mean that it was discriminated against because of its subject matter.
I found the movie to be excessively violent, steeped in mysticism, expressing a proclivity for the cult of the Virgin Mary, and lacking a firm Scriptural base.
The cinematic violence began with the beatings of Jesus at his arrest. The bridge scene was particularly outrageous. But we read in Matthew that the only violence recorded was Peter’s use of a sword on the ear of a servant of the high priest. Jesus immediately reprimanded Peter and corrected the problem (as one would expect from a man of peace). Not only that, but John tells us that those sent to arrest Jesus weren’t sure what they were getting into. He says that when Jesus identified himself “they drew back and fell to the ground;” hardly the eager to strike bullies depicted in the film. Furthermore, Mark quotes Jesus as asking, “Am I leading a rebellion that you have come out with swords and clubs to capture me?” This indicates a willingness to go peaceably which the text leads one to believe he did. In fact, according to John, the first instance of violence directed toward our Lord occurred when an official didn’t like what he perceived as insolence on the part of Jesus in answering a question put by the high priest. We are told that he “struck him in the face.” Certainly this would not have been noted if Jesus had received the treatment shown in the movie.
The Gospel writers make it clear that Jesus was beaten, mocked, spit upon, flogged, and ultimately crucified for our sins. But the movie takes liberties even with this. For instance, during the flogging Jesus is depicted as being almost out when suddenly he rises to his feet in a momentary bit of defiance. Rather than causing one to empathize with the Son of the Living God, one feels like one is watching Rocky Balboa in a late round of a championship fight. But Jesus is quickly beaten down again and the blood continues to flow. Indeed, seemingly gallons of red are splattered everywhere during the movie.
If one didn’t already know the story, one would be inclined to view it as a mystical journey quite beyond understanding. The movie continuously highlights strange looking characters that seem menacing; one guesses that they are supposed to be Satan and his minions. But treating the devil as a space alien adds nothing to the film and detracts from the truth that Satan was being defeated by the very events being depicted.
I was also struck by the constant attention paid to Mary throughout the movie. Numerous cameos and a constant presence gave the impression that the movie was as much about her as it was about him. No doubt Mel Gibson’s Catholicism spilled into the movie. Any true depiction of the passion of Christ should properly concentrate on him and his suffering. It is too bad that the emphasis on Mary is allowed to detract from the central story.
It is perhaps a sign that American Christians feel besieged in a culture gone haywire that so many have boiled down the question of the merits of this movie to a simple equation: us verses them. It doesn’t need to be that way. Christians may disagree on the quality of the film and certainly non-Christians may also.
# posted by kef1000 @ 2:34 PM 
