Every Easter my wife and I
try to rewatch Mel Gibson’s The Passion of Christ, so I was pleased to read
that Mel Gibson was going to make a sequel to his powerful and brilliant film, with Jim Caviezel once again portraying Jesus.
In 2004 I wrote a column about
the film for The Orchard Press Online Mystery Magazine, where my Crime Beat
column and crime fiction appeared.
You can read the column
below:
Mel Gibson and The Passion of the Christ
I recently saw Mel Gibson's
The Passion of the Christ. The film is powerful. I can't think of another film
that has so touched me.
Gibson's film, based on the
Gospels and history, also offers Gibson's artistic symbolism.
Biblical movies were a part
of my growing up in the 1950s and the 1960s, as were westerns, comedies, horror
and crime films. I was raised Catholic and the Biblical films, from Ben-Hur to
The Greatest Story Ever Told, provided me with far better depictions of my
religion than the dry readings I was taught at Catechism. (Later in life, I also very much liked the Franco Zefferilli's TV mini-series Jesus of Nazareth).
I've read theology,
philosophy, history, novels, and the original source material - The Bible. But
the old movies left an indelible mark on my mind and my soul. Film is a
powerful medium and Gibson's film will no doubt be with me all of my life.
As widely reported, Gibson
sunk $25 million of his own money into his pet project, the portrayal of the
last hours of Jesus. Gibson said he wanted to realistically show the brutal
torture and murder of Jesus Christ. With the bloody violence, dialogue spoken
in the original languages of Latin and Aramaic with subtitles, Gibson took a
huge chance on this film.
His gamble - or, one might
say, his faith - appears to have paid off.
The film, which no one in
Hollywood originally wanted to touch, was number one at the box office for
three weeks running. To date, the film has made $315 million and with Good
Friday and Easter coming up, the film is expected to earn much more. The film
is expected to become one of the highest grossing films ever.
"This is a story about
love, hope, faith and forgiveness," Gibson told reporters. "Jesus
died for all mankind, suffered for all of us. It’s time to get back to that
basic message."
Adding that he thought the
world was going "nuts," Gibson noted that we could all use a little
more love, faith and forgiveness. In a time of lessening morals, family ties
and personal responsibility, as well as suicidal mass murderers acting in the
name of God, I'm inclined to agree with Gibson.
Despite the strong public
approval via the box office, there has also been much criticism and controversy
surrounding the film, from cries of anti-Semitism to his use of graphic
violence. The film is indeed violent, but I didn't see anti-Semitism in the
film.
In the film we see Caiaphas
and the other Jewish leaders judging Jesus and then taking him to the Roman
governor, Pontius Pilate. Pilate, as we all know from the Gospels, washed his
hands before the Jews and then had Jesus crucified. But Gibson also depicts
sympathetic Jews, like Simon and Veronica who came to Jesus's aid. And of
course, Mary and Jesus himself were Jews.
As Gibson told ABC News'
Diane Sawyer, there were no Norwegians in evidence during Jesus' crucifixion,
only Jews and Romans. He also disagreed with the assessment that his film will
incite anti-Semitism. After viewing Shindler's List, Gibson told Sawyer, he
didn't go out and beat up Germans.
Mankind, Gibson told Sawyer,
killed Christ.
The film is truly violent,
but I think the violence was necessary. Prior to his crucifixion, Jesus was
"scourged" with a particularly nasty weapon called a flagellum, which
is a whip with leather throngs holding pieces of metal and bone. In many cases,
Ive read, the victim died from the scourging and never made it to the
crucifixion.
Gibson shows us Jesus'
strength, authority, and grace. I particularly like the way Gibson portrays
Jesus' confrontation with Satan at Gethsemane. Satan, as many critics have
noted, resembles the bald, female Irish singer Sinad O'Conner, and he appears
on the sidelines throughout the film.
"The Prince of
Darkness," Gibson suggests, is always close at hand.
After praying on his knees
for guidance and strength, Jesus stands and forcefully stomps the symbolically
evil snake that Satan had released from his cloak. Jesus is no meek hippie in
this film.
Jesus also stood strong and
dignified when facing the powerful Roman governor. Beaten, bound and bleeding,
Jesus tells Pilate, "You would have no power over me if it were not given
to you from above."
Jesus changed the course of
history. Michael Grant, the author of The Twelve Caesars and History of Rome,
wrote that millions of men and women have found Jesus' life and teaching
overwhelmingly significant and moving.
"The most potent figure,
not only in the history of religion, but in world history as a whole, is Jesus
Christ: the maker of one of the few revolutions which has lasted," Michael
Grant wrote in Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels. "His was the
most dramatic life ever lived."
Gibson, the director and star
of Braveheart, gave us a superb film about Jesus. The Passion of the Christ is
a fitting film for our age, I think. With terrorism and crime on the rise
worldwide, I believe we need to see, hear, and feel how Jesus suffered and died
for our sins.
Widely reported in the press
was the case of a couple that fought with each other after seeing Gibson's
film. Stating that it was the dumbest thing they've ever done, a Georgia couple
admitted that they argued and fought over a theological issue and ended up
stabbing and assaulting each other.
The deputy sheriff who
arrested the couple told reporters that he thought the couple missed the point
of the film.
Millions of us did not.
You can also read a Hollywood Reporter piece on the Mel Gibson sequel via the below link:
You can also read a Hollywood Reporter piece on the Mel Gibson sequel via the below link:
No comments:
Post a Comment