|
Are you going to see The Passion of The Christ?
The decision is upon you. It opens in theaters February 25.
Mortality is little more than the endless process of making important choices – and
surviving the consequence. Your decision to see -- or not see -- The
Passion of The Christ may ultimately itself be one of passion.
Unless you’ve been in a coma -- or care nothing for movies or popular culture
--you know by now that The Passion of The Christ is Mel Gibson’s
controversial feature film that focuses on the last 12 hours of Jesus’ mortal
life.
I wrote about the film before I’d seen it. My perspective was professional.
See “Shared
Passion”.
This time I have seen the film. My perspective is personal.
Word of the film has spread primarily as a result of myriad private screenings
with Christian clergy, Jewish critics, selected media, high-profile hosts
including, Michael Medved, Bill O’Reiley, Opra and Keith Fournier. And
from time to time guys like me.
My two sons and I were invited to a private screening of the film at ICON Production
[Gibson’s company] in Los Angeles. Mel Gibson stayed for an hour after
the screening to discuss the film with us. Needless to say it was a fascinating
experience -- in two parts.
Immediately following the screening of the film, I was anxious to write this
article. My face-to-face dialogue with Mel Gibson about his film and my
own efforts to portray the Christ in The Testaments was an exciting
tale to tell. But I could not even discuss it with my wife. Before the
screening, we signed a confidentiality agreement with a promise to say
nothing of our experience, nor share our reactions in private or in press.
The long silence gave me time for the unforgettable images of the film to distill
upon my mind. It gave me time to incubate my feelings and measure them
against my understanding of the Savior. During the period of imposed silence,
I gave much thought to what I would eventually say to you here. My feelings
are conflicted. I wonder if I should write anything at all.
Meanwhile Meridian readers bombarded me with diverse criticisms of my comments
in the earlier article. Some of you are hungry for more information about
the film. Others demand that I tell them whether or not they should see
the movie.
I was released from my “vow of silence” a few weeks ago. This is the moment
of truth. What do I tell you about the film? Do I recommend that you see
it or take it off your list?
Very little. Yes. No. Maybe.
Is the flurry over The Passion much ado about nothing as some have suggested? “It
is only a movie after all,” a friend pointed out. I beg to differ. The
Passion of The Christ is much more than “only a movie.” In comparison
to the movies of fantasy, escapism, hedonism, and even decadence that dominate
our popular culture it is much, much more.
As a motion picture, The Passion of The Christ is a brilliantly-crafted
piece of art. Gibson’s enormous talent as director was evident in Braveheart.
In this film he is even better. This film is distinguished by a personal
passion that transcends his earlier work in significant ways. Gibson’s
deep belief in the Catholic tradition and the passion of Jesus is evident
in every frame.
Unlike almost every other feature motion picture spawned – one way or the other – by
the Hollywood system, Gibson’s film is a very personal adventure. It was
made without studio support and without major distribution. Gibson made
the film with his own money. Reportedly at a cost of $25,000,000 dollars.
On that basis alone The Passion of The Christ becomes singular among
the motion pictures of our time. To see or not to see this film may merit
more than a quick scan of simple criteria.
If
you are browsing this article in search of a “notable quote” from Kieth
Merrill on which you can hang your decision – or abrogate your personal
responsibility -- here it is.
I can neither encourage nor discourage anyone from seeing The Passion of
The Christ.
Films can have a powerful impact on people, but no two people are impacted
in exactly the same way. I liked it very much for a variety of reasons.
Parts of it were difficult to watch. I plan to see it again.
I am grateful to Mel Gibson for his talent and his sacrifice. I am grateful
that he created this intense vicarious experience as an emotional supplement
in my quest to know the Christ and look upon his face. But that is me and
you must decide for yourself. It is not a film for everyone by any standard.
The controversy swirling about Gibson’s film from its earliest beginnings has
been focused on four issues.
(1) No English is spoken in the film. The
announcement that the dialogue would be in ancient Aramaic with English
subtitles shocked Hollywood insiders and left audiences around the world
trying to imagine the story of Jesus as a foreign language film.
(2) The film is accused of being anti-Semitic. Jews and others have condemned the film as “fanning anew the flaming plague of prejudice that has afflicted the Jewish people for 2000
years.” They express fears that the film could actually result in bringing violence
to Jews. They are wrong.
The Jewish community and anti-defamation league is fearful that the film emphasizes the role of Jews in the death of
Christ. They are right. The Jews are depicted
as culprits in the death of Jesus, but their fears ignore historical reality.
In the version of the film I saw, the role of the Jews is not unduly “emphasized,” but
they are clearly and accurately implicated according to the Biblical history.
Commentator, David Limbaugh said it perfectly. “How ironic that
when a movie producer takes artistic license with historical events,
he is lionized as artistic, creative and brilliant, but when another
takes special care to be true to the real-life history, he is vilified.”
(3) The film is extremely graphic in the depiction of the torture and death
of Jesus. Whatever other issues you may consider in your decision to see
or not see the film, it is important that you become fully aware of (a)
the intensity of the experience and the gripping, painful realism of the
torture and merciless treatment of Christ and (b) Gibson’s merciless graphic
window on those awful events. Your sensitivity – and tolerance -- to the
graphic realism of the events surrounding the capture, trial, torture and
death of Jesus Christ as described in the New Testament must ultimately
be your primary consideration. For your and for your family.
(4) Mostly for Mormons. The film is rated R.
Some of you have said that the MPAA rating board has made your decision
for you. “If the film is rated R, I am not going.” Others wonder
how we can ever expect to depict with realism the greatest of the Book
of Mormon stories on the big screen without the blood of battle – and the
inevitable R-rating from the distorted “make love not war” morality of
MPAA – and not support films like The Passion of The Christ.
Let me address this R-rated issue first. I think it would be sad
if you relinquished your agency to the MPAA and miss the film only on the
basis of the collision between “rated-R” and Mormon doctrine.
Obedience is better than sacrifice. I encourage no one to do anything
inconsistent with their faith. I believe in following the prophet. In 1986
President Benson told the Aaronic Priesthood, "We counsel you,
young men . . . don't see R-rate movies or vulgar videos or participate
in any entertainment that is immoral, suggestive or pornographic." Every
prophet since has reiterated that inspired advice.
The doctrine of R-rated evolved in the 2001 Strength of Youth Pamphlet.
"...choose only entertainment and media that uplift you. Good
entertainment will help you to have good thoughts and make righteous
choices. It will allow you to enjoy yourself without losing the Spirit
of the Lord. Do not attend, view, or participate in entertainment that
is vulgar, immoral, violent, or pornographic in any way. Do not participate
in entertainment that in any way presents immorality or violent behavior
as acceptable."
This doctrinal document does not include any reference to R-rated
movies or the MPAA rating code. The responsibility is no longer carried
on the shoulders of the anonymous men and women who rate the movies in
Encino California. It is squarely upon us.
We can no longer say, “R it is bad”. “PG-13 is OK.” We must apply
a different standard. It is easy to define the criteria. It is difficult
to measure ourselves against them.
If you are tempted to attend The Passion of The Christ out of some sense
of morbid curiosity or to be “entertained,” don’t go!
Consider seeing the film only if you are sincere in your quest to gain greater
insight into the death of Christ. I say “death of Christ” because that
is what the film is about.
Consider seeing the film only if you seek a deeper and historically detailed
appreciation of the last 12 hours of a life that changed the world.
Consider seeing the film only if you can glean from the brutality of the images
a better understanding of the ultimate purpose of His life.
Consider the film only if you are confident it will engender good thoughts,
inspire righteous choices and allow you to retain the Spirit of the Lord.
The graphic nature of the images notwithstanding, nothing I saw deprived
me of the spirit of the Lord. To the contrary, seeing the Savior through
the eyes of his mother touched the deepest part of my soul.
People experience films differently. Some are enveloped and engaged. Some are
entertained. Some are objective observers. Some are consumed by the subjective
power and vicariously experience feelings and emotions otherwise impossible.
You must know thyself in facing the decision.
While most of the articles written by those who have attended private screenings
have been positive there are many detractors. There follows two opposing
views and very different perspectives. I present them without comment to
help you in your choices.
The first is from: Most Rev. Stefan Soroka, Metropolitan of the Ukrainian Catholic
Church in U.S.A., Archbishop of the Archeparchy of Philadelphia
“I would not recommend the movie to my friends nor to the faithful (and particularly
the young), because the film, while interesting in the way some things
are portrayed (particularly evil), lacks content to really engage my
interest.
If you want to see over two hours of cruelty, intense torture, and lots of
blood, with tidbits of informing scenes of who this Jesus is, you might
want to sacrifice your time and money to see this movie. The Passion
makes an extraordinary effort at presenting the horrific effects of a
crucifixion, a very cruel punishment inflicted by the Roman Empire on
its subjects. Roman soldiers are depicted in long and lingering scenes
of enjoying the scourging, whipping with instruments that tear at the
flesh, and exercising their authority harshly and without mercy. The
film offers very few flashback scenes of Jesus in his lifetime, and ends
sharply with just an indication of his resurrection. There is very little
offered to help the viewer to come to know and appreciate Jesus in his
humanity and in his divinity.”
The second is from: Keith Fournier, well-known author and constitutional lawyer
“From the gripping opening scene in the Garden of Gethsemane, to the very human
and tender portrayal of the earthly ministry of Jesus, through the betrayal,
the arrest, the scourging, the way of the cross, the encounter with
the thieves, the surrender on the Cross, until the final scene in the
empty tomb, this was not simply a movie; it was an encounter, unlike
anything I have ever experienced.
In addition to being a masterpiece of filmmaking and an artistic triumph, The
Passion evoked more deep reflection, sorrow and emotional reaction within me
than anything since my wedding, my ordination or the birth of my children.
Frankly, I will never be the same. When the film concluded, this "invitation
only" gathering of "movers and shakers" in Washington,
DC were shaking indeed, but this time from sobbing. I am not sure there
was a dry eye in the place. The crowd that had been glad-handing before
the film was now eerily silent. No one could speak because words were
woefully inadequate. We had experienced a kind of art that is a rarity
in life, the kind that makes heaven touch earth.”
My experience in watching the film was much more Keith Fournier than the Reverand Sorokan. For me it was a positive experience. Powerful,
Memorable. Something I would not wish to delete from my mind or memory.
I look forward to seeing The Passion of The Christ when it opens on
1200 screens across America. I am told there have been changes. I worry
that the addition of digital effects will accentuate the brutality rather
than enhance the positive aspects of the story. I
wish Gibson had shown more restraint in the portrayal of violence.
There is much to like about this film. The depiction of Mary, mother
of Jesus, and the powerful connection so artfully presented between the
suffering man struggling beneath the cross and the carefree boy of youth
touched me deeply.
For all that is lovely and praiseworthy in the film my enormous
disappointment with The Passion of The Christ is that the
film is only about His death. There is no glory in the resurrection. No
appearance to the apostles to affirm the great miracle. No triumph over
death. No light to give meaning to the horrors of the pain and suffering
that went before.
The film I was hoping to see was obviously not the film Gibson set
out to make. Mel Gibson’s focus was intensely set on the authentic recreation
of the last 12 hours of Jesus’ life. He chose to put emphasis on the brutality
and torture and death. It can be disturbing or like one painting in a great
gallery of Christianity add a meaningful perspective to the broader understanding
without presuming to be an expression of totality.
I felt a bit betrayed. After enduring the brutality of torture and
the emotions of the crucifixion Gibson does not reward us with the ultimate
victory of Christ over the grave. I should have been prepared. Having traveled
the world and visited hundreds of Cathedrals and Holy Sites including the
Vatican, I am accustomed to the Catholic emphasis on the pain, the suffering
and death.
Latter-day Saints are blessed to know Jesus Christ, as few other
Christians understand Him. To us the story of Christ – even his death – is
ultimately about life and hope. From the darkness comes the light. From
His death comes life everlasting. There was none of that in Mel Gibson’s
film.
You could argue in fact that the film ultimately misses the whole
point of Christianity. The prelude to Christ's death and the death itself
is dramatic, but the message of the Gospel is not that Christ died. The
ultimate good news is that he defeated death. He rose from the grave. He
is alive and in drinking from the bitter cup - which Gibson captures brilliantly
- he gave mankind immortality and the possibility of eternal life.
There is only a fleeting impressionistic glimpse of the resurrection
in the version of the film I saw. In our conversation following the screening,
I asked Mel if he didn't think it would be a good idea to make more of
the resurrection. In movie terms, use the reality of the resurrection as
the ultimate "pay off and resolution" to the central question
of the film. He told me that there was some special affects to be added
that would enhance the final scene. I have not seen the final version but
based on the handling of the resurrection in the version of the film I
saw I do not expect that added effects will be sufficient to make the resurrection
what I so desperately wanted it to be.
During the incredible emotional journey that Gibson planned for
us, I prayed that he had used his enormous talent to depict the resurrection
in a way that would lift us from our sorrow and allow us to experience
the emotional exaltation that Christ's victory over death deserves. He
did not. At least, not for me.
Is The Passion of The Christ a film that you should see?
Yes. No. Maybe.
“It is only a movie for goodness sakes,” according to my friend.
It is only two hours in a lifetime. It is not the beginning, middle and
end of the Christian expression, nor is it intended to be. For those who
believe in Christ and who have “taken his name upon them,” the film may
be interesting or worthwhile or colorful bits of glass in the mosaic of
our lives.
I cannot recommend this film to you.
I cannot NOT recommend this film to you.
It was for me an uncommon experience that transcended most of what we have
come to expect in the movie theater. I will see it again on the big screen
when it comes to this area.
It is graphic. It is intense. It is brilliantly crafted. It is enlightening.
It is difficult to watch at times. It is something I would not want to
miss.
Not everyone will be able to watch it. Not everyone should. But for those who
go prepared and abandon themselves to the experience, it can be remarkable.
As a follower of Christ, I am grateful that Mel Gibson gave so much to
give me the experience of walking beside the Savior in his final hours.
Click here to sign up for Meridian's FREE email updates.
© 2004 Meridian
Magazine. All Rights Reserved.
|
