You got it, Ronzo! Today these "sources" are legion....
I finally saw The Passion of the Christ last night -- a profoundly moving film and an astonishing artistic achievement. I found myself seeing the unfolding action through the Blessed Mother's eyes (Maia Morgenstern portrayed Mary's profound suffering and personal courage to "see it through to the end" with her Son superbly, brilliantly. My tears flowed with hers....)
I was fascinated by Gibson's portrayal of Satan. I need to see the film again (perhaps several times) to confirm this for myself, but it seemed to me that Satan was visible only to Jesus; except for once, he/she/it was visible to Mary.
I say that Satan was unseen by the many because when he/she/it moved through the crowds, no one seemed to acknowledge or react to his/her/its presence. It's as if Satan were "invisible." Not even Judas gave any sign of seeing Satan directly, only through "proxies" -- the demon-like children who harried, jeered at, and chased him, culminating in his suicide.
On one occasion, it seemed to me that Satan was visible to Mary.
When Jesus bore the cross to Golgotha, with Mary alongside, Satan appeared with a "babe in arms," apparently intently looking at Mary. It was a monstrous parody, a jeering caricature of the Madonna with the child Jesus in her arms.
Of course, that "babe in arms" was no child, which was obvious from its total lack of the quality of innocence -- that "babe" was a hate-filled demon, sharing Satan's delight in the suffering and grief of the Holy mother and her Son. The "babe" was an anti-Jesus, and Satan an anti-Mary in that scene. It was a gratuitous, spiteful, evil parody of love and life -- and of a mother's incalculable sorrow and grief over the suffering of her only Son, borne with immense courage and grace.
It seems to me that people like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and the others you name have the same contempt for all that is good and holy. They are the implacable enemies of the Holy Spirit, divine and human. In this, truly they are satanic figures.
I agree --the depiction of satan was genius. And it did seem as if Jesus were the only one who saw "him/her."
For me, the portrayl of satan was more psychologically disturbing than even the flogging and the crucifixion, espeicially where the demon-children are tormenting Judas. Here we have absolute evil vs. absolute good --the ultimate showdown.
Satan's mocking of the madonna & child imagery was really powerful! But the crow pecking at the theif's eye was a bit over-the-top. However, I understand that birds and animals feeding on the bodies of the crucified was common, unless someone was there to shoo them away...
Overall, Mel does a fantastic job showing just how evil the entire crucifixion process was, which is something we need to see. The violence in this movie was the furthest thing in the world from the typical Hollywood gratuitous violence that one would find in a "Kill Bill" or "Dawn of the Dead" film. In 'The Passion,' the violence is the means of our redemption, and is probably one of the few, and perhaps only time where violence in a film has been redeeming.
When the critics complain of the violence of this film, it's not really the violence they're criticizing. Rather, they're complaining about the idea that violence can actually be redemptive. How dare we believe that something "good" can actually come from something "evil!" After nearly 2,000 years, the cross is still viewed as "foolishness" and "a stumbling-block."
Satan battles with Jesus over the sins of mankind. If you notice that as the scenes become more vicious in nature do you see Satan:
There is the mockery of the Madonna at the point when Satan carries the evil incarnation of a child in his arms. He and Mary do lock eyes during the Vina Dela Rosa.
This great ape of God can only imitate. He can't bring about the glory and redemption of man.
Both realms a battling for the souls of man."
Most of this information was given by Mel Gibson during an interview from The World Over. A Catholic Radio production.