Didn't need Gibson's gore to make me a believer

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | February 25, 2004 | CATHLEEN FALSANI RELIGION WRITER

[Chi-townChief]

I believe. That Jesus was a real man. That he also was really God.

That he was Jewish. That he lived in Israel with his family and his disciples.

That he willingly suffered horrendously and died awfully so that my sins -- and those of all humanity -- could be forgiven.

That he did so because he loves us. That his death brought grace to the world once, and for all. That by his stripes, we are healed.

That he rose again. That he's alive today. That he'll be back.

I also believe that the movie I saw Monday night about the last 12 hours of Jesus' life did little to affect what, how or why I believe.

And that might be hard for Mel Gibson to believe.

But it's the truth.

"The Passion of the Christ" is the most horrific film I've ever seen. I mean that literally and not as an artistic insult.

About 10 minutes into the 126-minute film, the worst depiction of torture I've ever had the displeasure of witnessing began as the character Jesus was led away by temple police from the Garden of Gethsemane under cloak of night.

The beating, scourging, disfiguring, flaying of flesh, and unforgivingly slow, unthinkably brutal execution of Jesus continues almost unmitigated until about three minutes before the final credits begin to crawl across the screen.

It's horrendous. It's sickening. It was at times physically impossible for me to watch.

I hid my eyes behind my hand, peeked at the screen through my fingers, covered my face with a scarf for a few minutes.

During one lengthy scene where his Roman tormentors unmercifully whip him with a cat-o'-nine-tails until there is hardly any flesh on his back then flip him over and have a go at the front of his twisted body, the sounds of bone crunching, blood squishing and skin being ripped apart were so intense, I found myself plugging my ears like a child.

Horrific.

But true, Gibson and his supporters say. And necessary, and calculated, they say.

"I wanted it to be shocking," Gibson told Diane Sawyer in a recent ABC interview. "I also wanted it to be extreme. I wanted it to push the viewer over the edge. And it does that."

Indeed, especially if that particular precipice leads to nausea and nightmares.

Heartfelt overkill

Gibson also said he wanted audiences to "see the enormity of that sacrifice . . . that someone could endure that and still come back with love and forgiveness, even through extreme pain and suffering and ridicule."

I believe that was his intention and that it was heartfelt.

However, with this particular member of the audience, it was overkill. It went too far, obscuring the story. That's the tricky thing with art, whether it's film, music, a painting or a dance. They all elicit responses from the audience. But the artist cannot control what the response will be.

Mine was revulsion. I felt as if I'd been visually assaulted. There was nothing spiritually inspiring about the brutality on film. It was just gross.

But a guy in the row behind me was visibly moved, in a good way, by the same elements of the film I found so troubling. From what he said, I think the film enlivened his faith, made him see anew the supernatural love that God has for him.

Gibson is a man whose personal aesthetics would seem (based solely on the films he's made in the past) to be much more comfortable with violent images than my own.

Maybe he needed to see the physical suffering of Christ to understand it. I prefer to use my imagination

After all, even though Gibson claims his depictions of Christ's passion in the film are based on what he says are strict, literal interpretations of Scripture, they are, despite all his reported research and scholarly support, at best simply a guess.

No one witnessed the crucifixion with a video camera in hand.

"The Passion of the Christ," which I believe is neither anti-Semitic nor gives the message -- explicitly or implicitly -- that the Jewish people collectively and for all time are responsible for killing God's son, is Gibson's idea of what the suffering and death of Christ looked like. It's simply his vision. He says that.

But it's a vision I didn't need to understand how much Jesus loves me, or how much he suffered on my behalf.

Back to The Book

After watching "The Passion," I reread those familiar accounts of Jesus' final hours in the Gospels of Saints Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. I am not a scholar, but from my readings, by and large, the film sticks to the text. There are dramatic embellishments, such as the woman who wipes Jesus' face on the Via Dolorosa. That's not in the Bible.

Neither is the one scene that made me cry, the single moment that made me stop and contemplate the sacrifice I believe Jesus made for all of us. As Jesus staggers through the streets of Jerusalem dragging his cross toward Golgotha, his mother, Mary, John his apostle and Mary Magdalene run through a warren of alleys trying to get ahead of the procession so Mary can get closer to her son.

When the three catch up to the procession, Mary hesitates as she has a flashback to Jesus as a little boy, running through the dusty gravel in their backyard. The child Jesus of her memory stumbles and falls, and she rushes toward him and picks him up.

It was instinct. It was human. It was real, even if it wasn't necessarily true based on Scripture.

That one tender moment reminded me of Christ's humanity in a way that stirred my soul far more than two hours of brutal gore and suffering ever could.

Yes, Jesus was God. But he was also a man. A man with a mother who loved him and friends and a career and doubts and fears who chose to die a horrible, painful, humiliating death in order to save the world that killed him.

But I didn't learn that from a movie.

It's what I believe.

[TheDon]

You misunderstand my intent. I was giving you one of the resources that helped me to answer your question. Give it a try.

[savedbygrace]

Just got back from seeing the film, and surprisingly I am disappointed. It seems disjointed in places, the music was second-rate, and they seemed to have a difficult time color correcting the scenes to provide consistency with mood throughout.

Plus, I thought the scene with the crow on the thief's cross cut across the tension that they had just spent the past hour building, destroying the flow at that moment.

Also, I thought the snake crawling out from Satan's robe and getting crushed by Jesus' foot was just plain silly.

OTOH, I didn't think the blood and gore was overdone. However, the Centurian who Pilate charged with Jesus' life during the scourging was unbelievable in this regard: a Roman Centurian who was given such a charge would NEVER have gone AWOL and allowed his charge to be endangered of life like that. Serious script mistake.

We've got tickets for Saturday afternoon. Maybe I'll have a better take on it after a second viewing.

[Texaggie79]

He did many things. Saving the thief, and dying on public display for all to know He had died were 2 of them.

[IDontLikeToPayTaxes]

Why are people so bothered by this movie? The idea, to me, is very simple. To depict in a real and graphic way the suffering Christ went through. Why is that so difficult to deal with?

I agree. It was a brutal movie, no doubt about it. But the violence wasn't THAT bad. Sheesh.

From some of the reviews I've read before I watched the movie tonight, I was expected the most gruesome, sickening, vile, unimaginable, vomitous imagery the human mind can possibly create.

And it's just not the case. This movie is violent, but it's entirely watchable. Some people just need to stop whining.

[loftyheights]

And what Jesus' message was is forgiveness of sins, even though you don't deserve it. The Pharisees and Scribes couldn't handle this religion of grace because it destroyed their religion of salvation through one's own merits, apart from a Messiah. Sounds familiar. Lots of that going on today.

[Ronzo]

I just saw the film...amazing!

I also believe that the impact of the almost unrelieved violence and bloodshed is lessened by one’s anticipation. This is an important consideration for parents considering whether to take children to see the film. I believe that children who know the gospel story, who have been warned and who are braced for what they will see, and who are sitting with trusted adults and with friends, can handle this experience. It will have a powerful effect on them, and I believe the effect will be beneficial. My suspicion is that for many children the bloodshed per se will be less of a problem than the brutality; it is not the blood on Jesus’ face, it is the looks on the Roman executioners’.

My little daughter is BEGGING ME to take her to see this movie! I told her that they really show the Romans actually hammering the nails through Jesus' hands. Her reply: "I dont' care!" I told her how they show how he was severely flogged, almost unto death. Her reply: "I don't care!" I told her that it shows, in a very real fashion, how he suffered and died. Her reply "I don't care!" I told her she won't understand any of the dialogue, that it's all in Aramaic and Latin. Her reply: "You can just whisper to me the words on the screen." (She's not a very advanced reader...)

She wants to see this movie! She is not the least concerned about the violence, all she cares about is that it's about JESUS, and that's reason enough to go see it. She knows all about the flogging and the nails and the cross from other Bible-based movies and stories. Will I take her to go see it? We'll see...

An interesting thought occured to me...maybe instead of keeping children away from this film, it might be a very good experience for them to see it, as long as they know ahead of time what they are in for. One thing for sure, they will realize the reality of violence and suffering, and how evil men can be to their fellow man. And they will have an appreciation for the REALITY of what Jesus did FOR THEM that no Bible story or other movie could ever match.

Let me say it like this: I'd much rather my little girl see "The Passion" twenty times over then watch either "Legally Blond" or "Bridgett Jone's Diary" even one single time....think about it....

[Dianna]

But that isn't really a good enough reason. I don't think it is good for me to see it.

I respect your view. For me, it's kind of like needing to see the 9-11 footage. Having that explained in words wouldn't convey the horror. Maybe wouldn't stir my soul enough to give me the strength to oppose that evil.

Perhaps seeing the sacrifice Jesus made for me will help me have the strength to resist sin.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

I don't think you have to see this film.

Having worked in medicine, I'm quite aware of the fact that some people even pass out at the sight of blood.

So I think people should respect the fact that not all people will be able to see this movie, nor will they want too.

But I also think you should respect the fact that some people WILL want too, and will really get something out of it.

The other thing that amazes me is all this controversy over anti-semetic messages in the movie. How could this be true when Jesus was a Jew? The fact is Jesus was also a Rabbi.

So all this arguing over seeing the movie or not.. over it being devisive or not,..is just ridiculous. Either see it or don't.

CHRIST'ianity started with CHRIST!

So many of these arguements aren't really arguements when you look at them logically. This is just ridiculous!

DON'T SEE THE MOVIE.. no one is forcing you too!

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

See my post 168. Sheesh

[hocndoc]

The violence was hard to take, but I kept reminding myself that I only had to endure 2 hours, while Jesus lived the whole 12 hours.

The Gospel is there, the flashbacks are welcome relief and reminders of our Hope, and the stone rolls away to a risen, clean, and healed - except for a few scars - Christ.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

I hope he makes a TON of money on this movie. That way he can make a BUNCH MORE like it, based on say the 10 commandments? Further Scripture and Gospels?

God willing we'll see more quality movies like this..since he couldn't get anyone from Hollywood to distribute THIS one!! And word has it that after doing a "religious movie" his career is ruined. (We'll see about that one!).

I have NO Problem with him making a TON of money on this!

I also have no problem with people acknowledging that Jesus suffered and died for our sins.

I know that certain religions disagree with wearing religious symbols like crosses, etc (Mormons, for one, etc) and that is their right,. but my belief system would not be one of those. That doesn't mean I will necessarily be buying one of these necklaces,. but I won't be telling people they can't buy one!

Good luck to Mel.. I hope he makes a TON off this film and selling merchandise! Then I hope he makes more Biblical based films!!!

You're welcome to your opinion Linda.. I totally like you and repect your opinion on other matters. We will just need to disagree on this one.

FRegards

[Dianna]

My little daughter is BEGGING ME to take her to see this movie!

Did you have the opportunity to see the PAX tv showing of the making of the movie? What stuck with me after watching that wasn't the brutality of the scenes I saw, but the eerie/creepy vision of Satan hovering around.

You might want to see this for yourself or find out other people's reactions to Satan in the movie. Obviously, he is evil and around, but I'd hate to see a child upset by visualizing Satan hanging around over her shoulder trying to influence her.

[Cold Heat]

My humble review

February 26, 2004

During the course of my lifetime, spanning some 54 years thus far, I have never seen a film that has affected me as The Passion Of Christ has done.

I thought I knew what it was all about, and I thought that I had the requisite understanding of the pain and sacrifice that Jesus had suffered and made in all our names.

I was prepared to see the film, had read the reviews and had even read the naysayers accounts of their varied objections to what Mel Gibson had created. Oh yes, I was the self appointed expert on what I had understood to be the “truth".

I had lived my life to best of my ability in a way that I thought God wanted and I had listened intently to fellow Christians as they witnessed their faith and had even read the Scriptures and marveled at their contents.

Well, there is the setup, and now comes the story…………

I knew in my heart that something was going to happen to me in some way before I went to see this film. I cannot say why I knew this, but I did. I was not prepared at all for what did occur, and I never suspected the profound influence that this wonderful movie would have on me. This may sound a bit foolish to some of you who have known the truth that I discovered only last night, but I must write this and admit my ignorance of so many years.

Previously, I knew that Jesus gave his life for ALL our sins. I repeated this fact often and I thought I understood all that needed to be understood. Or, so I thought.

But, I learned that he had in fact died for ME!

So simple, yet so profound. The simplest things are so often the most important of all.

A concept that has eluded me all these years that I could never quite get a handle on, I now have my arms wrapped around it, and have embraced it fully.

My relationship with Jesus is now a personal one, more so than I ever thought possible. It is no longer in the second or third person as I had understood it before. I feel like a fool. I feel like a man who went to bed with a cancer and woke up cured and healthy. How or why I did not understand this concept before is totally beyond me.

In my humble opinion, I believe to be one of the driving forces behind the making of this film and the reason that Gibson had to make and share it with all of us.

The critics, the naysayers, the haters, the fearful and the voluminous publicity that this film has received is now but a footnote to me. I want to thank Mel Gibson for helping me to see the TRUTH and I believe that many, many others who like me were missing this important truth will find it in this fantastic presentation.

[dennisw]

"I wanted it to be shocking," Gibson told Diane Sawyer in a recent ABC interview. "I also wanted it to be extreme. I wanted it to push the viewer over the edge. And it does that."

Mel knows exactly what the role of violence in films is. So do John Woo and Quentin Tarrentino. I call it manipulation of your emotions. Many here will object but some of the violence is gratuitous.  This is the most gory depiction ever of Christ's epic suffering and only achievable with modern cinematic techniques. Ya gotta wonder how Christians thorough the ages kept their faith renewed without such graphic imagery. </sarcasm>

I will see this one day when it comes out in DVD and will skip past the ultra gore.

[hocndoc]

The scene when Claudia brings Mary the white cloth struck me as a woman who has had to stand by, silent and powerless to really *do* anything, while men do what they think they have to do (while they probably also feel powerless).

[Dianna]

Can anyone comment on the portrayal of Satan in the movie? I accept that Satan is around, but as an adult, it's slightly creepy to envision him actually existing right behind me.

Might this part bother kids? (Or is it just me? LOL)

[mysterio]

I agree with your assessment. I felt that I needed to see it to get a better idea of the sacrifice that Jesus made for all of us. I could barely take it. The audience in the theater was crying, and one lady started screaming. It's probably mostly an accurate portrayal of what happened to him. A look at the Shroud of Turin shows the wounds are accurate, with the notable exception that he was probably nailed through the wrists instead of the hands. The whole film left me horrified. I think that people should see it. I don't think I could stand to see it again, though.

[hocndoc]

I think that it was necessary and helpful for the film to show the influence of evil in the events. And it was a new thought for me - that Jesus' temptation did not end in the Garden of Gethsemane.

I was also struck by the thought that Mary was probably younger than I am (about to turn 48) and that Jesus was old enough to have given her grandchildren who would have been nearly grown themselves. I want to have lots of grandchildren and great-grandchildren to love, myself, and thoroughly spoil the grand daughter I have, now. But I'm aware that some of the desire for descendents is because I want a part of myself to live on in them.

But, Mary will live on in each of us who have her Son's spirit next to ours, and in our grateful memory and appreciation of the Gift she gave us by submitting to God.

[Cold Heat]

But, Mary will live on in each of us who have her Son's spirit next to ours, and in our grateful memory and appreciation of the Gift she gave us by submitting to God.

I thought Gibson's portrayal of Mary was very good. It was in keeping with the fact that she was the only one who truly knew beforehand what the day was going to bring.

It was accurate that she would know the her son was fulfilling the prophesy of the Old Testament.

Leviticus, I believe.

[k2blader]

I think maybe people on both sides naturally get offended when they think folks on "the other side" are implying they are better than them.

Despite my foolish tendencies at times, I know for a fact I'm no better than anyone else. But I honestly do not understand why some Christians who aren't planning to see the movie have such a strong reaction against the violence they've heard is depicted in the film.

It makes me wonder, "What do they think the crucifixion was?" The physical torture Jesus endured wasn't even the worst of it.

He willingly took all our sins onto His holy and perfect being--the filth; the depravity; the rapes of babies; the heinous mutilations of defenceless, living human bodies; the brutal killings committed in maelstroms of jealousy, rage and lust; our mind-murders and fathomless depths of pride; all that was and is wrong within every human soul throughout all of history and the future--and covered it over with His blood that we may be called "sons of God".

Yes, it was violent.

But how beautiful the sacrifice! How glorious the victory.