Blog Archive

It is hard to over-estimate the challenge Mel Gibson set for himself in making The Passion. Its subject matter is one sure to offend a variety of people regardless of how it turned out. For Christians it is at the heart of their faith. For many non-believers it is a bizarre religious story. For Jews it brings up uncomfortable and fearful connections with persecution and violence. What are the odds that he could make a film that wouldn’t arouse emotion and controversy?

As we all know by now, he obviously failed to escape the trap he set for himself. The movie has aroused controversy, anger, and vitriol as well as praise and appreciation. In fact its dominance as a cultural topic was a big reason I went to see the film. I should admit as a caveat that I am not really a movie person. Oh sure I enjoy them like everybody else but they are not my medium of choice. I much prefer books. I am not a visual person, although I know what I like, and do better with the written word. But given my faith and my interest in popular culture, I felt I needed to see this film and interact with it. What follows are my thoughts and ideas having seen the film and read quite a bit about it.

Coming away from the film I was at a loss to describe my feelings. I had a very heavy heart despite the happy ending and the bright sunshine that blinded me as I exited the theatre. I felt the weight of the subject. I believe that Christ died to pay for my sins and the sins of all mankind. I believe Christ death and resurrection compose the central acts of human history. Because of this, I couldn’t really just leave the film laughing and joking around. In many ways, I wanted to put some distance between me and the events portrayed on screen but in more important ways I wanted to digest them. I felt pushed and pulled going into the film and I felt that way coming out.

After another day to think about the film, I have been unable to get past my ambivalence or conflicted feelings about the film. In some aspects the film was a powerful portrayal of the last days of Christ and of his message. But in other ways it was a weird and confusing mass of symbols and events. In my humble opinion it is not a great film as a whole but given the subject and the realism it can’t help but impact people of faith. Here are some thoughts (“spoilers” included):

- A great many people criticized the violence. I didn’t find the violence repulsive or pornographic, although it was gory. Rather, I found that the gore in many ways dehumanized Christ and made it hard for me to connect with him in the film. He seemed drenched in watery blood for so much of the film that it created a barrier between the character and the audience. The violence might have been accurate, I don’t know, but at some point it became counter-effective for me personally. Rather than concentrate of his words, as subtitles no less, you were always struck by his bodily condition.

- Most likely intentionally, Mary was the human focus. She was the person you related to and connected with emotionally. She is a sort of visual narrator, moving through the film and seeing both the horror and the necessity of the events. She is the representation of holiness and faithfulness. As seem appropriate within Catholic theology, she is the person through which you approach Christ.

- I thought the use of the androgynous devil character was taken to far. Did we really need the maggot crawling in its nose to let us know it was evil? The scene where she is holding the baby with the face of an old man was also jarring and distracting. Again, I failed to see the point (although I read somewhere it had to do with contrasting the new Adam with the old Adam or some other analogy). I could see the point of Satan haunting the events but the way is was presented was bizarre and confusing to me.

- Likewise the whole Judas episode. I didn’t understand why Gibson needed to focus so long on Judas going mad and killing himself. This also brought in additional violence and gore, not to mention oddness. As he scratched his face and chewed his lips raw, I kept wondering why he was kept in focus for so long. Then the weird kids with devil faces chased him out of the city and he hung himself above the maggot infested lamb. I suppose this was more deep symbolism but it turned me off as too macabre.

- I thought the way Pontius Pilate was handled was fair and effective. I don’t think he was shown in a favorable light so much as a conflicted one. He didn’t want any trouble but he didn’t want to take responsibility either. Evil is not always the result of purely vile intentions, but can come from a simple lack of will.

- The most controversial subject is the flogging scene. I wasn’t sickened or revolted by the blood so much as the sadism of the Roman guards. But I felt the scene lacked clarity. Why are the guards so sadistic? Is it just in their nature? Have they lost touch with humanity after so much violence and bloodshed? With Christ, the more he is past a certain point the less you can understand him as a human being. At some point he becomes a piece of meat; and that is disturbing. But the point was explained at the very beginning of the film, His suffering is a result of our transgressions, He was beaten for our iniquities. Christ’s torture is part of his sacrifice. Not coming from a symbolic or liturgical background, and not being a visual person, I felt the weight of that pain but not the spiritual connection I imagine Gibson does.

- The most spiritually moving parts of the film are the flashbacks that connect Christ’s ministry and mission with his final acts. Christ is the ultimate example of sacrificial love, he is the propitiation for our sins. Again, if you come from a more literal and liturgical tradition, there is a particularly potent symbolism here. Christ flesh and blood become the Eucharist. His sacrifice washes away your sins. If their is any part of the film that could plant a seed of faith in the non-believer it would be these powerful visual adaptation of the core Gospel message. Any believer, no matter the tradition, is bound to be impacted by them as well.

- Jesus’s interaction with the criminals on the cross was also effective. You see the arrogant and defiant criminal mocking Christ and you see the humble and repentant criminal reach out to Christ in his final moments. One realizes that he is guilty while the other continues to lash out at others even in his final hours. It shows Christ willing to reward even that little bit of faith the criminal had.

- In some ways the ending was effective. Its rather subtle and quiet, and certainly brief, allusion to Christ’s resurrection has a certain power. All that darkness and violence couldn’t defeat the Son of God. But it some ways it was anti-climatic as well. The whole film was heavy, dark, and blood soaked it would have been nice to bask in the glow of the risen Christ longer. Despite the empty tomb it was hard to shake off the weight of the last couple of hours.

Looking back on the film, I can’t say that I was deeply affected by the film spiritually or intellectually. Certainly, I was reminded of the pain and suffering Christ endured to pay for my sins. Certainly, I was humbled and quieted by this “in your face reminder.” But it seemed to me simply Mel Gibson’s personal view brought to the screen. Perhaps, I am asking too much, but it didn’t seem to me to rise above a physical portrayal and say something deeper. It didn’t bring a deeper meaning to the last hours of Christ’s life, or at least it didn’t effect me that way. Was I glad I went? Yes, I am glad I had the experience. But I am not interested in seeing it again.

Tomorrow I hope to explore two additional issues: the Catholic/Protestant perspective and the issue of anti-Semitism.