Passion - A Review
Introduction
Dramatization of the passion of Christ has been around for many centuries, and has developed from simple passion plays in the Greek theatre to the sophisticated cinematography of the last century. Religious films have always received widespread attention from both believers and non-believers alike, receiving both acclaim as well as deep criticism.
The recent movie, “Passion of the Christ”, likewise, was received with much anticipation. Directed and produced by Mel Gibson at a personal cost of US$25 million, it was released on 25th February 2004, and amassed US$125 million in the opening five days.
The movie covers the final 12 hours of Jesus Christ and begins in the Garden of Gethsemane. It traces his arrest by the Jewish authorities, his trials before Pilate and Herod, His scourging, the walk to Golgotha and finally the crucifixion. Finally there is a short scene of the resurrection.
Much has already been said and written about this movie by both adherents and critics alike.
To make a fair assessment of this film, one must examine the intent of the director and see if he, indeed, was faithful to his purpose. The genre of the film is also important in our review as a historical work is different from an artistic film. To what extent should artistic license have been allowed in the film ? To what extent should the director be allowed to interpret and add events ?
“My intention for this film was to create a lasting work of art and to stimulate serious thought and reflection among diverse audiences of all backgrounds…My ultimate hope is that this story’s message of tremendous courage and sacrifice might inspire tolerance, love and forgiveness. We’re definitely in need of those things in today’s world…When you tackle a story that is so widely known and has so many different pre-conceptions, the only thing you can do is remain as true as possible to the story and your own way of expressing it creatively… This is what I tried to do… I really wanted to express the hugeness of the sacrifice, as well as the horror of it. But I also wanted a film that has moments of real lyricism and beauty and an abiding sense of love, because it is ultimately a story of faith, hope and love. That, in my view, is the greatest story we can ever tell…One of the greatest hopes I have for this film is that when audiences walk away from it, they will be inspired to ask more questions”.
(Mel Gibson)
By the end of this paper, I hope to have explored the merits of the film as well as the boundaries that have been crossed. Finally, the question remains, “Where does the film lead us to in our own walk with God?”
A Critical Review
The Story or His-Story ?
The official website of the movie reports that the screenplay was adapted from the four gospels. There was no mention of alternative sources. However, a critical look at the film will reveal that certain scenes were either additions from non-biblical sources or an artistic license and interpretation taken by the director.
The director’s own religious background was fundamental in his interpretation and expression of the film. He belongs to the Traditionalist wing of the Roman Catholic Church, which still performed the Mass in Latin, abstains from meat on Fridays, avoids ecumenism and other things that were changed at the Vatican II Council in the 1960s.
Two important sources which he admitted to have influenced the screenplay of the film included “The Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ”, written by St. Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824), an Augustian nun at the Convent of Agnetenberg, Germany and “The Mystical City of God”, written by St. Mary of Agreda (1602-1665) .
Gibson also relied heavily on the Catholic “Stations of the Cross” as well as the “Five Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary” in showing the sequence of events in the last 12 hours of Jesus’ life. The road to Golgotha followed the 14 “Stations of the Cross” strictly and included extra-biblical events like the wiping of Jesus’ face by St. Veronica’s cloth which resulted in his face being imprinted on it, Jesus falling three times with Mary urging him on, and the cradling of Jesus’ body by Mary after his death (also known as the Pieta).
Gibson claimed to “remain as true as possible to the story”. Perhaps he was really sincere in what he said because he regarded his extra-biblical sources as being as authoritative as the four Gospels. In fact, Pope John Paul II, after watching the movie, was said to have commented, “It is as it was.”
A closer look will reveal this movie to be the Roman Catholic version of the passion of Christ, something which Protestants should be aware of, lest we accept this film lock, stock and barrel, and laud it as some Evangelical church leaders have done. (See Annex 1) The merits of the film should be balanced against the extra-biblical and Roman Catholic slants.
Realistic portrayal or just gory extravagance ?
The impressive set designs, costumes and lighting gave the film an authentic feeling of epic proportions. The use of the original languages (Aramaic and Latin) was applaudable for its effort and, together with the brilliant cinematography, brought out the flavour of those times very well. However I question if it added anything more to the understanding of the film, other than making it intelligible to the ordinary viewer without subtitles.
The director wanted to “express the hugeness of the sacrifice, as well as the horror of it”. This he did with a heavy, and almost exclusive, emphasis on the suffering of Christ. He devoted a full ten minutes to the scourging scene which has horrified many viewers and elicited some strong reactions as to its appropriateness. Interestingly, Gibson paid a lot of attention on an event which had very little written about it in the four gospels. In fact, a survey of the gospels only mentioned that Pilate “had Jesus flogged”. (Matt 27:26, Mark 15:15, John 19:1) The flagellation of Jesus is a vital part of the “Stations of the Cross” and is one of the “Five Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary”. It is with this background in mind that we can understand why this scene was so prominent in the film.
However, the question beckons. Why is it then that the gospel writers were so brief in their description of this event ? Full chapters, on the other hand, were written about Christ’s crucifixion. For them, surely, the crucifixion of Christ on the cross was the climax of his mission on earth and therefore deserved much reporting. Indeed the apostle Paul said, “we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.” (1 Cor 1:23)
Whilst the scourging scene may have been over-indulged in, the crucifixion scene, on the other hand, was well done, although the scene of Christ’s arm being dislocated for the crucifixion was borrowed from St. Mary of Agreda’s “The Mystical City of God”.
Did Gibson go overboard in his attempt to show Christ’s suffering ? Was it a true portrayal or just gory Hollywood extravagance reminiscent of Gibson’s previous movies ?
I feel he did well to realistically remind Christians just how much Christ went through for our sins. Modern day Christianity, by and large, has forgotten Christ’s sacrifice and perhaps, needs a reminder as to the immensity of our sin that has required such an immense sacrifice.
The Struggle between Good and Evil
The appearance of Satan in various scenes was used to portray the dark and evil times during those last 12 hours. From the beginning of the movie, Satan was portrayed as the tempter in the Garden of Gethsemane – questioning Jesus’ right and ability to bear the sins of the world. The scene in which Jesus stomped on the head of the serpent was an allusion to the passage in Genesis 3:15b in which it was written : “he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel”. This scene is adapted from Emmerich’s “the Dolorous Passion” and never happened in the biblical record. In fact, an angel strengthened Jesus after his prayer in the garden. (Luke 22:43)
Further on, Satan was personified in the diabolical children who tormented Judas Iscariot after his betrayal and subsequently led to his suicide.
Satan was again seen during the scourging of Jesus and once again at his death.
As much as one would like to believe and acknowledge the part played by the evil one in the death of Christ, one must also acknowledge the fact that the biblical writers did not mention the role of Satan at all. In fact, the only one-on-one encounter (barring the exorcisms) between Jesus and Satan occurred during the temptation in the desert after Christ’s baptism.
The constant appearance of the devil as the “antagonist” versus Jesus the “protagonist”, I feel, has sensationalized and added a touch of Hollywood into the film. Far from providing answers, it has raised unanswerable questions about the significance of the scene of the baby in the devil’s arms, his androgynous appearance, his appearance in the Garden of Gethsemane – all of which were absent from the biblical records.
The bible is silent as to the part played by the devil in the death of Christ. What it is not silent about, however, is the part played by man. Ultimately, what or who sent Jesus to the cross ? Was it Satan ? No. Was it just the Jews ? No. All of us did. Was it a lost battle between good and evil that sent Christ to the cross? No. Jesus said, “I lay down my life--only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. I lay it down on my own.” (John 10:17-18) It was never a losing battle. It was a quest and a journey. He was intent on the cross from the beginning. It was His choice. A necessary choice.
Mary – A mother’s love or the Mother Loved ?
The biblical records are also relatively silent about Mary, especially in relation to the passion of Christ. She is only mentioned during the crucifixion when she was presented to the care of John the disciple by Jesus.
The movie gives Mary much more exposure than is mentioned in the bible. She is present at the trial of Jesus and when he is imprisoned, she seems to have fore-knowledge as to his location.
She is also present at the scourging of Jesus and, together with Mary Magdalene, wipe his blood from the ground. This particular scene is adapted from Chapter 23 of Emmerich’s “Dolorous Passion of Jesus”.
Mary is again seen on the way to Golgotha, during which she gives strength to Jesus when he falls to the ground under the weight of the cross. This scene is taken from the Catholic “Stations of the Cross”. There are flashbacks to the early life of Christ where Mary is seen running to aid of infant Jesus when he falls. Now in his adulthood and during his passion, Mary is again seen running to the aid of Jesus. At this point, Jesus is seen drawing strength from her presence and saying, “Behold I make all things new.”
One must realize that the director’s Catholic background has clearly influenced his interpretation of Mary’s role in Christ’s sacrifice. The belief that Mary is the co-redemptrix (co-redeemer) and mediatrix is alluded to in these scenes in which she is seen as suffering alongside the Suffering Saviour. There is even one scene at the cross where she says to Jesus, “My son, let me die with you.”
Throughout the movie, Mary is also reverently called “Mother” by Jesus’ disciples, a clear Catholic slant since all Catholics address Mary as “Mother”. Her quiet strength and unfailing support for her Son spoke clearly of a mother’s love for her child. This was all the more made poignant by the scene in which Mary was seen cradling the body of Jesus after he was brought down from the cross. This is in contrast with the biblical record in John 19:38-40 which mentioned only Joseph of Arimathaea and Nicodemus taking down Jesus’ body
It is one thing to portray and honour a mother’s love. It is another thing to exalt Mary as the Mother, the Co-Redemptrix, the Mediatrix.
“Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)
There is only one Saviour, one Redeemer, one Mediator.
In conclusion,
This movie should be commended for its attempt to portray the sacrifice of our Lord in a realistic non-sentimental manner. It serves to remind Christians, who would otherwise not have an understanding of the physical pain and suffering that our Lord went through for us. The discomfort that many have felt during the movie surely stems from the fact that we have been shielded from the reality of the cross on which our Suffering Saviour hung for six hours. It jolted me to the realization of the immensity of my Saviour’s love for me – especially as the images of him being whipped flashed across the screen again and again. Indeed, “with his stripes we are healed”. (Isa 53:5) His determination to the cross and his utter commitment to remain ON the cross until “it is finished” (John 19:30) speaks volumes of my need for a Saviour who would carry my sins for me. There was no other way.
It is also commendable that the movie did not end with the death but the resurrection of Jesus. It did not end with hopelessness but with victory and an anticipation of things to come. This, I feel, was an appropriate ending and a means for further discussion should this film be used as an evangelistic tool. The hope of the Christian lies not in the death of Christ, but His resurrection – because “if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain.” (1 Cor 15:17)
Whilst this movie can be used as a valuable evangelistic tool, one must be aware of the subtle innuendoes present in the film. The strong Roman Catholic background with its Marian focus and theology must be made known to Christians who might be tempted to embrace this film in its entirety. A call for greater discernment should be made. Ambiguous scenes, involving the devil and other characters, that are not found in the biblical records should and must not be embraced as gospel truth, just because this film shows some semblance to a religious work.
Annex 1
Some comments from respected Evangelical church leaders :
“Everytime I preach or speak about the Cross, the things I saw on the screen will be on my head and mind.” - Billy Graham
“I can’t tell you how I admire, respect and applaud you … an awe-inspiring portrayal of the last hours of Jesus’ life. It is an accurate account of Jesus’ real suffering for the sins of the whole world.” - Dr. Robert Schuller
“Brilliant, biblical – a masterpiece” – Rick Warren
“deeply moving, factually accurate and unprejudiced in its presentation” – Jack Hayford
Dramatization of the passion of Christ has been around for many centuries, and has developed from simple passion plays in the Greek theatre to the sophisticated cinematography of the last century. Religious films have always received widespread attention from both believers and non-believers alike, receiving both acclaim as well as deep criticism.
The recent movie, “Passion of the Christ”, likewise, was received with much anticipation. Directed and produced by Mel Gibson at a personal cost of US$25 million, it was released on 25th February 2004, and amassed US$125 million in the opening five days.
The movie covers the final 12 hours of Jesus Christ and begins in the Garden of Gethsemane. It traces his arrest by the Jewish authorities, his trials before Pilate and Herod, His scourging, the walk to Golgotha and finally the crucifixion. Finally there is a short scene of the resurrection.
Much has already been said and written about this movie by both adherents and critics alike.
To make a fair assessment of this film, one must examine the intent of the director and see if he, indeed, was faithful to his purpose. The genre of the film is also important in our review as a historical work is different from an artistic film. To what extent should artistic license have been allowed in the film ? To what extent should the director be allowed to interpret and add events ?
“My intention for this film was to create a lasting work of art and to stimulate serious thought and reflection among diverse audiences of all backgrounds…My ultimate hope is that this story’s message of tremendous courage and sacrifice might inspire tolerance, love and forgiveness. We’re definitely in need of those things in today’s world…When you tackle a story that is so widely known and has so many different pre-conceptions, the only thing you can do is remain as true as possible to the story and your own way of expressing it creatively… This is what I tried to do… I really wanted to express the hugeness of the sacrifice, as well as the horror of it. But I also wanted a film that has moments of real lyricism and beauty and an abiding sense of love, because it is ultimately a story of faith, hope and love. That, in my view, is the greatest story we can ever tell…One of the greatest hopes I have for this film is that when audiences walk away from it, they will be inspired to ask more questions”.
(Mel Gibson)
By the end of this paper, I hope to have explored the merits of the film as well as the boundaries that have been crossed. Finally, the question remains, “Where does the film lead us to in our own walk with God?”
A Critical Review
The Story or His-Story ?
The official website of the movie reports that the screenplay was adapted from the four gospels. There was no mention of alternative sources. However, a critical look at the film will reveal that certain scenes were either additions from non-biblical sources or an artistic license and interpretation taken by the director.
The director’s own religious background was fundamental in his interpretation and expression of the film. He belongs to the Traditionalist wing of the Roman Catholic Church, which still performed the Mass in Latin, abstains from meat on Fridays, avoids ecumenism and other things that were changed at the Vatican II Council in the 1960s.
Two important sources which he admitted to have influenced the screenplay of the film included “The Dolorous Passion of our Lord Jesus Christ”, written by St. Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824), an Augustian nun at the Convent of Agnetenberg, Germany and “The Mystical City of God”, written by St. Mary of Agreda (1602-1665) .
Gibson also relied heavily on the Catholic “Stations of the Cross” as well as the “Five Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary” in showing the sequence of events in the last 12 hours of Jesus’ life. The road to Golgotha followed the 14 “Stations of the Cross” strictly and included extra-biblical events like the wiping of Jesus’ face by St. Veronica’s cloth which resulted in his face being imprinted on it, Jesus falling three times with Mary urging him on, and the cradling of Jesus’ body by Mary after his death (also known as the Pieta).
Gibson claimed to “remain as true as possible to the story”. Perhaps he was really sincere in what he said because he regarded his extra-biblical sources as being as authoritative as the four Gospels. In fact, Pope John Paul II, after watching the movie, was said to have commented, “It is as it was.”
A closer look will reveal this movie to be the Roman Catholic version of the passion of Christ, something which Protestants should be aware of, lest we accept this film lock, stock and barrel, and laud it as some Evangelical church leaders have done. (See Annex 1) The merits of the film should be balanced against the extra-biblical and Roman Catholic slants.
Realistic portrayal or just gory extravagance ?
The impressive set designs, costumes and lighting gave the film an authentic feeling of epic proportions. The use of the original languages (Aramaic and Latin) was applaudable for its effort and, together with the brilliant cinematography, brought out the flavour of those times very well. However I question if it added anything more to the understanding of the film, other than making it intelligible to the ordinary viewer without subtitles.
The director wanted to “express the hugeness of the sacrifice, as well as the horror of it”. This he did with a heavy, and almost exclusive, emphasis on the suffering of Christ. He devoted a full ten minutes to the scourging scene which has horrified many viewers and elicited some strong reactions as to its appropriateness. Interestingly, Gibson paid a lot of attention on an event which had very little written about it in the four gospels. In fact, a survey of the gospels only mentioned that Pilate “had Jesus flogged”. (Matt 27:26, Mark 15:15, John 19:1) The flagellation of Jesus is a vital part of the “Stations of the Cross” and is one of the “Five Sorrowful Mysteries of the Rosary”. It is with this background in mind that we can understand why this scene was so prominent in the film.
However, the question beckons. Why is it then that the gospel writers were so brief in their description of this event ? Full chapters, on the other hand, were written about Christ’s crucifixion. For them, surely, the crucifixion of Christ on the cross was the climax of his mission on earth and therefore deserved much reporting. Indeed the apostle Paul said, “we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles.” (1 Cor 1:23)
Whilst the scourging scene may have been over-indulged in, the crucifixion scene, on the other hand, was well done, although the scene of Christ’s arm being dislocated for the crucifixion was borrowed from St. Mary of Agreda’s “The Mystical City of God”.
Did Gibson go overboard in his attempt to show Christ’s suffering ? Was it a true portrayal or just gory Hollywood extravagance reminiscent of Gibson’s previous movies ?
I feel he did well to realistically remind Christians just how much Christ went through for our sins. Modern day Christianity, by and large, has forgotten Christ’s sacrifice and perhaps, needs a reminder as to the immensity of our sin that has required such an immense sacrifice.
The Struggle between Good and Evil
The appearance of Satan in various scenes was used to portray the dark and evil times during those last 12 hours. From the beginning of the movie, Satan was portrayed as the tempter in the Garden of Gethsemane – questioning Jesus’ right and ability to bear the sins of the world. The scene in which Jesus stomped on the head of the serpent was an allusion to the passage in Genesis 3:15b in which it was written : “he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel”. This scene is adapted from Emmerich’s “the Dolorous Passion” and never happened in the biblical record. In fact, an angel strengthened Jesus after his prayer in the garden. (Luke 22:43)
Further on, Satan was personified in the diabolical children who tormented Judas Iscariot after his betrayal and subsequently led to his suicide.
Satan was again seen during the scourging of Jesus and once again at his death.
As much as one would like to believe and acknowledge the part played by the evil one in the death of Christ, one must also acknowledge the fact that the biblical writers did not mention the role of Satan at all. In fact, the only one-on-one encounter (barring the exorcisms) between Jesus and Satan occurred during the temptation in the desert after Christ’s baptism.
The constant appearance of the devil as the “antagonist” versus Jesus the “protagonist”, I feel, has sensationalized and added a touch of Hollywood into the film. Far from providing answers, it has raised unanswerable questions about the significance of the scene of the baby in the devil’s arms, his androgynous appearance, his appearance in the Garden of Gethsemane – all of which were absent from the biblical records.
The bible is silent as to the part played by the devil in the death of Christ. What it is not silent about, however, is the part played by man. Ultimately, what or who sent Jesus to the cross ? Was it Satan ? No. Was it just the Jews ? No. All of us did. Was it a lost battle between good and evil that sent Christ to the cross? No. Jesus said, “I lay down my life--only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. I lay it down on my own.” (John 10:17-18) It was never a losing battle. It was a quest and a journey. He was intent on the cross from the beginning. It was His choice. A necessary choice.
Mary – A mother’s love or the Mother Loved ?
The biblical records are also relatively silent about Mary, especially in relation to the passion of Christ. She is only mentioned during the crucifixion when she was presented to the care of John the disciple by Jesus.
The movie gives Mary much more exposure than is mentioned in the bible. She is present at the trial of Jesus and when he is imprisoned, she seems to have fore-knowledge as to his location.
She is also present at the scourging of Jesus and, together with Mary Magdalene, wipe his blood from the ground. This particular scene is adapted from Chapter 23 of Emmerich’s “Dolorous Passion of Jesus”.
Mary is again seen on the way to Golgotha, during which she gives strength to Jesus when he falls to the ground under the weight of the cross. This scene is taken from the Catholic “Stations of the Cross”. There are flashbacks to the early life of Christ where Mary is seen running to aid of infant Jesus when he falls. Now in his adulthood and during his passion, Mary is again seen running to the aid of Jesus. At this point, Jesus is seen drawing strength from her presence and saying, “Behold I make all things new.”
One must realize that the director’s Catholic background has clearly influenced his interpretation of Mary’s role in Christ’s sacrifice. The belief that Mary is the co-redemptrix (co-redeemer) and mediatrix is alluded to in these scenes in which she is seen as suffering alongside the Suffering Saviour. There is even one scene at the cross where she says to Jesus, “My son, let me die with you.”
Throughout the movie, Mary is also reverently called “Mother” by Jesus’ disciples, a clear Catholic slant since all Catholics address Mary as “Mother”. Her quiet strength and unfailing support for her Son spoke clearly of a mother’s love for her child. This was all the more made poignant by the scene in which Mary was seen cradling the body of Jesus after he was brought down from the cross. This is in contrast with the biblical record in John 19:38-40 which mentioned only Joseph of Arimathaea and Nicodemus taking down Jesus’ body
It is one thing to portray and honour a mother’s love. It is another thing to exalt Mary as the Mother, the Co-Redemptrix, the Mediatrix.
“Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)
There is only one Saviour, one Redeemer, one Mediator.
In conclusion,
This movie should be commended for its attempt to portray the sacrifice of our Lord in a realistic non-sentimental manner. It serves to remind Christians, who would otherwise not have an understanding of the physical pain and suffering that our Lord went through for us. The discomfort that many have felt during the movie surely stems from the fact that we have been shielded from the reality of the cross on which our Suffering Saviour hung for six hours. It jolted me to the realization of the immensity of my Saviour’s love for me – especially as the images of him being whipped flashed across the screen again and again. Indeed, “with his stripes we are healed”. (Isa 53:5) His determination to the cross and his utter commitment to remain ON the cross until “it is finished” (John 19:30) speaks volumes of my need for a Saviour who would carry my sins for me. There was no other way.
It is also commendable that the movie did not end with the death but the resurrection of Jesus. It did not end with hopelessness but with victory and an anticipation of things to come. This, I feel, was an appropriate ending and a means for further discussion should this film be used as an evangelistic tool. The hope of the Christian lies not in the death of Christ, but His resurrection – because “if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain.” (1 Cor 15:17)
Whilst this movie can be used as a valuable evangelistic tool, one must be aware of the subtle innuendoes present in the film. The strong Roman Catholic background with its Marian focus and theology must be made known to Christians who might be tempted to embrace this film in its entirety. A call for greater discernment should be made. Ambiguous scenes, involving the devil and other characters, that are not found in the biblical records should and must not be embraced as gospel truth, just because this film shows some semblance to a religious work.
Annex 1
Some comments from respected Evangelical church leaders :
“Everytime I preach or speak about the Cross, the things I saw on the screen will be on my head and mind.” - Billy Graham
“I can’t tell you how I admire, respect and applaud you … an awe-inspiring portrayal of the last hours of Jesus’ life. It is an accurate account of Jesus’ real suffering for the sins of the whole world.” - Dr. Robert Schuller
“Brilliant, biblical – a masterpiece” – Rick Warren
“deeply moving, factually accurate and unprejudiced in its presentation” – Jack Hayford
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home