 |
The Passion |
|
|
The Passion |
First, if you are not familiar with
Screenit.com
(and I'm talking to parents and youth), please visit it. Without
bias, it strives to relate simply and quickly what is contained in
various media offerings...movies, CDs, etc. It does not recommend or
condemn anything...it only presents what it is, so parents and youth
may make their own decisions.Here is Screenit.com's review of
"The
Passion." View the official website of
"The
Passion" here. See the recent statement by
the U.S. Council of Catholic Bishops, `The
Bible, The Jews, and The Death of Jesus'
(Feb. 11, 2004). The bishops also provide the online New
American Bible. What follows is the best
assistance I can offer to families considering seeing "The Passion of
the Christ." They represent my views only. Your response is welcome
at mstallbaumer@mphm.com.
Read what others have said
in response to the film and/or my take on
the film.
Spoiler Warning: We know the story, but in offering this
review I found it difficult to avoid mentioning several specific
points about how the story is told.
Should I See It? Should My Kids/Students See It?
In terms of cinematography, casting, setting, editing, etc., it
is a brilliant, masterful storytelling. I am so familiar with other
movies of Jesus that this one provided many original, unique and
thought-provoking elements. It is beautiful, powerful, glorious,
painful, dreadful, inventive and faithful (to scripture and
tradition). Half of me is appreciative of the work and builds my
faith in the power of the love of Christ and the importance of the
lives we live. And, half of me wishes this movie were never
made.
It is the most powerful film I have ever seen, and it is the most violent...by far. One does not see this film to be entertained or even educated. One attends to gain understanding and appreciation for the love of Christ. We know the story, and this movie invites us to see it as it was... and to enter more deeply into the truth, the power and the grace of Christ's victory on the cross...and the price paid.
I respond to the question, "Should I see it?" or,
"Should my child see it?" with my own questions: Do you want to, need
to or feel compelled to see it? Your response is your answer. If you
do not feel you need to see this movie, then you don't need to see
it. It is not necessary to see this film to know Christ and the
victory he won over sin and death. But you must know Christ, and you
must know what he truly suffered. To those who choose to see it, you
will gain much from this powerful and faithful rendering. And what
you will gain will be uniquely yours. I devoted one class period
discussing this film to each group I teach (seventh and eighth
grade). I believe most of these students (ages 12-14) know whether or
not they want to see the film. As a parent, I would greatly respect
and consider what they say, but I would absolutely see it with them.
If there is hesitation or uncertainty, I would recommend
waiting...especially until the video version is released. When you
have more control over the film with a remote, less audio/visual
impact, no public audience, etc...the viewing experience will be
tempered. It is unsuitable for young viewers. Gibson himself says no
one under 13 should see it. See the ScreenIt review (above) to assist
you.
Language and Subtitling--This film is presented in Aramaic,
Latin and Hebrew. After five minutes I rarely noticed (or needed) the
subtitling. However, a young person's familiarity with the Passion
Narrative and reading ability should be considered. I felt the
original languages offered authenticity and power to the
storytelling. It helps one familiar with the Passion to experience it
in a new way. There are times when the subtitling is needed, helpful,
and necessary, but I saw it as authentic and never cumbersome.
Classroom Use/Application--Thus far, I have made great use in
simply discussing the film in Catholic school and religious ed.
settings, without showing a single scene. I will show the Agony in
the Garden scene to junior/senior high students when it is available,
but I would not show any more of it to a junior high class. It is
rated R, and should be rated NC-17 for violence. I could see some
powerful uses for it in a high school or adult scripture study or
formational setting, however. I recall one curse word--from
Peter--but that is scripturally accurate in his denial of Jesus.
(Matthew
26:74..."At that he began to curse and to
swear, 'I do not know the man.'") There is no nudity or drug use, of
course, but many historians suggest that one goal of crucifixion was
to totally humiliate, and Christ probably was naked after he was
stripped of his garments and nailed to the cross.
While such unique elements as character development, authentic
languages, metaphor, reality of violence, etc. would be most
benefical in an educational setting, I personally feel I get a lot
more mileage out of discussing the film unseen, or showing a film
such as "Jesus of Nazareth," a better movie for young viewers (and
older, I suspect) in that it portrays the entire life of Christ, from
the Infancy Narratives to the Resurrection and beyond. In fact, an
informational, catechetical version was produced. Although at six
hours and 22 minutes in length, it is best watched in sections.
The Violence-- "This film is the most violent I have ever
seen. It will probably be the most violent you have ever seen. This
is not a criticism but an observation; the film is unsuitable for
younger viewers, but works powerfully for those who can endure it."
The words are Roger Ebert's, and I can only echo them. He gave the
film his highest rating. We may be a society desensitized to
violence, but never has there been a movie where such ferocity is
directed so intensely and dramatically toward one individual for two
solid hours, especially toward someone we care so much
about.
Early early on, Jesus' right eye is swollen (nearly) shut and he is thrown over a cliff (still in chains) before he even reaches the palace of Caiaphas following the Agony in the Garden. (The cliff-throwing is not scriptural here, but it is attempted in Luke 4, early in his ministry. There it was unsuccessful. Here Judas watches in torment.) For me, viewing the scourging scenes (to his back and his front) was a journey from shock and horror to an eventual dazed numbness. In presenting such a horrific scourging, and a Jesus battered into disfigurement, Gibson intensifies the rest of the Way (of the Cross): We don't want to see this Jesus even have to move a limb, let alone walk, carry, fall, etc. And he will.
In this film, we are often jarred, surprised and angered. I was taken aback by the random, unexpected and relentless assaults upon Jesus throughout the entire film--the hate, spitting, shoving, continual fists to the face, relentless flogging along the Way. I would say they occurred at unexpected times, but they happened most all the time. It seemed so unnecessary, but that is--of course--part of this storytelling. As Catholics, we tend to know what to expect in our Passion readings and Stations of the Cross devotions. I was unprepared for the unexpected. This made it all the more too real.
In viewing this film, one strives to fathom how
anyone, including the fully human Jesus, could absorb this brutality.
From a technical standpoint, I found it incredible that the human
body could possibly contain any more blood than was spent during the
scourging scenes. The lance in the side (at almost the two-hour
point) suggested otherwise, as a Roman soldier is showered by it.
Jesus' blood spills or spatters on anyone, everyone and everything
close to him, or at least those who did not flee. There is a
30-foot-plus path of blood as he is dragged from the pillar!. He
falls twice more than the traditional three times, by my count--each
time being more severe: A back-breaking fall over the cross, a fall
down stone steps, a fall crushing his skull (and thorns) between
cross and earth. The actor separated his shoulder during one of the
falls depicted in the film. The actor also suffered hypothermia
during the winter filming in Italy, was struck by lightning twice (in
a flashback Sermon on the Mount scene and on the cross), and was
accidentally flogged twice. Gibson employs slow motion so often that
I wondered if the film could have been a half hour shorter. When he
cuts away from a particular moment of violence, we are
relieved...momentarily. (Running time is two hours and six minutes.)
In most of this movie, Jesus is unbelievably scarred unlike any
traditional film or painting has ever rendered.
The Unique and Well Done-- I celebrate many elements of this
storytelling. Gibson was able to present and develop characters,
mainly because the story centers on Christ's last twelve hours.
Simon, Mary Magdalene, Veronica, the two crucified with Jesus and
others are given more screentime. Simon of Cyrene's portrayal in this
film is powerful to behold. Gibson symbolizes evil through a hooded
Satan character, serpents, "devil children," surprises, and other
elements we have not seen in movies of Jesus before. They are
powerful and unique in this telling. One is particularly poignant
between Jesus and Mary. It gets the only laugh in the movie, and made
me wish for a "prequel." Yet, this movie is not about the life of
Jesus, but the reason for the life of Jesus.
There are several moments in the film that inspired and strengthened
me, in particular. In describing them to students, I have called them
"Rocky moments." I explain that even though the endless sequels have
made the Rocky franchise silly, it was very original in the beginning
and took the Oscar in 1976. People were cheering the screen as if it
were a real fight. In these moments in this film--and you will know
them when you see them--one feels Jesus will surely collapse. Yet he
gets up, stands up, holds firm, embraces and lifts high his cross.
His resolve to make his Father's will his own and never look back is
absolutely incredible.
When I say this film presents the Passion
incredibly, I mean the very essence of the word. I felt it could not
be believed that one person could endure this. Yet one did. Jesus did
this willingly, and this movie made that clearer to me than any
production before it. If this were a movie about any other
protaganist of any other story, I would have been less affected. Yet,
this is Jesus, and he willed this. I feel this is the greatest
accomplishment of this storytelling.
Mel Gibson and the Controversies--Much has also been made of
the producer, his faith, his statements, etc. In my mind, to call him
a "Traditional Catholic" serves one purpose--to divide. He has said
that he disagrees with Vatican II. So he does. I always learned that
the word catholic means "universal." I may disagree with some of
Gibson's positions regarding our Church, but I welcome his production
if for no other reason than the number of people who are seeing it,
discussing it, and coming to know the Christ. If I choose to support
him and his production it is not because I liked him in Lethal Weapon
or what Mass he chooses to attend. It is interesting to note how the
messianic themes of suffering, sacrifice, salvation, etc. flow
through many of his films ("Braveheart," "The Patriot," etc.) Many
call this film a "Catholic version" of the events. I feel it is,
since we stand on two pillars...scripture and tradition (with
emphasis on the Stations). I commend him in making this film when
major studios rejected it, many groups and individuals of many
religious backgrounds (including our own) condemn it.
Every movie of Jesus is controversial. Just as it
was in his own time. Much has been made of anti-Semitism in this
film. Perhaps only a Jewish person can respond to this. However, I
can only offer my own position. After much study, and having seen the
film, I have personally concluded that there is no basis whatsoever
for this claim. Some of the screenplay that is not "word-for-word"
from the gospels has been said to be anit-Semetic. I never sensed
this prejudice, even as I was aware of it and looking for it. The
mob's cry "His blood be on us and on our children!" is found in
Matthew, and was omitted from this movie (although it was in the
original screening). According to imdb.com, it is Mel Gibson's own
hands that hammer the nails in Christ's hands, hoping to symbolically
dispel any notion of hatred toward any individual or group charged in
Jesus' death. Yes, there were some Jewish leaders who sought to hand
Jesus over to death. To understand Christ's sacrifice is to see how
all sinners share responsibility. No proper reading of the gospels
implicates all Jews of that day, and certainly no Jewish person today
or since. As Christians, we share and celebrate our Jewish ancestory.
If anyone is made to look evil, sinister (and even silly and
obsessed), it is the soldiers of Rome. I am personally surprised so
much attention has been given to the very little that is in the
gospels regarding this. I am reading the Acts of the Apostles with my
eighth grade students at this writing, and words of Peter and Stephen
to some of the Jews are striking in comparison. Yet I explain that
this is not a condemnation of an entire race, religion, creed, etc.
The "heroes" of this story were Jewish , as well.
Summary-- If you are unsure about seeing this film then don't,
at least not right now. The gospels lack any vivid, detailed,
horrendous description of Christ's suffering, as they compare to this
film. Yet this production is perhaps as authentic as any to the
actual events of the Passion of Christ, based solely on our knowledge
of Roman crucifixion. It is not necessary that you see this cinematic
interpretation of the final twelve hours of Christ's life. It is
necessary that we know the story, through family discussion, reading
of scripture, meditation upon the Stations, etc.
Again, this review represents my opinion, and your
feedback (staff, parents, students, parishioners) is most welcome at
mstallbaumer@mphm.com.
If you email me, please let me know if your comments about the movie,
or my review, are for me, or for consideration for posting on this
page, as I am happy to consider them.
Response and Comments From
Others
Read a letter to the editor entitled, "Deal with Feelings," which appeared in the Topeka Capital Journal on March 26, '04 by parishioner Dennis Schafers, R.N., counseling site supervisor of Catholic Charities of Topeka.
Thank you for writing this. I couldn't possibly
think of another thing to add. I can't say it was a movie I 'enjoyed'
but I was certainly moved by it. --Mrs Gutierrez
Mike, I would suggest reading Isaiah
52: 13-15 and 53:1-12
before they view the movie. I saw it Friday and I could barely talk
afterward. I thought the movie was violent, inspiring, encouraging,
emotional, and I am glad I saw it. --Mrs. Coker
I just read your review. What a great job of explaining all aspects
of the film! I know I do not want to see the film, but if my daughter
decides to see it when on video I think I will be more prepared to
discuss it intelligently! Thanks. --Mrs. Scheopner
For some reason, I was not very emotionally affected by the movie being too distracted by the violence (to be honest, I've seen worse) and actually think that earlier versions (such as Zefferelli's version and even the end of Ben Hur which was actually being broadcast when I got home from the Passion) had more impact on me. I absolutely do not recommend this to children. There's some great technical stuff and symbolism. Mary's the best thing in the movie, in my view. I particularly loved the "flashback" (and those are terrific throughout the movie) where she is being the quintessential "Jewish mother." I did find the very end from Christ's death to the resurrection exceptionally well done, especially the scene in the temple which has been damaged, but the final shot is awesome. I'd say adults should see it and judge for themselves how well Gibson has done. If nothing else it sends you to the source as you think "I don't remember that in the Gospels." I went home and re-read the crucifixion passages in all four gospels. And for me, that was the best part of seeing the movie. Just my opinion. --Mrs. Proctor
I was browsing around on the internet looking at some old Topeka sites and checked out the MPHM site to see what new changes had been made, and I saw your reflection on the movie. We have been planning on seeing it tomorrow night. I'm glad I saw your essay on it when I did so I have some things to think about and look for when we see it. It was very well written. Saturday morning at 6am I'm heading down to Belize for a spring break service trip that is sponsored by Campus Ministry here at Rockhurst. We're going to be building a house for a family down there and working at a clinic/nursery for children with HIV. I'll be coming back the following Saturday. I'm really looking forward to it, it should be a great experience. --Andy Eck, student at Rockhurst
You answered all questions I came away with. I
find it so wonderful that we are all discussing the gift of Jesus.
Thank you for this very informative review. --Mrs. Kenagy
It was very powerful. It helped me understand more clearly what our
Lord id to save us from our sins. --Jesse, seventh grader
This movie is good to see to show the last twelve hours of Jesus'
life. It is good whether you are a Catholic or not. This movie is
meant for a mature audience (13+). You will take something from this
film. --Kate, eighth grader
It gave me a completely different look on how much Jesus actually
went through. --Melissa, eighth grader