The Passion of the Christ

[skalenfehl]

My wife and I don't watch rated R movies so I never saw this one. Has anyone else seen it and if so what are your personal thoughts of the movie? There are no right or wrong answers and this thread isn't about rationalizing movie ratings. I'm just curious to know what people thought of the movie who saw it. Thanks.

[a-train]

Never saw it, but I read the book.

-a-train

[kona0197]

I saw it. I own it. Made me cry.

[melissar]

I have seen it. It made me cry also. I thought it was pretty graphic and should of focused more on the resurrection

[Iggy]

I saw it, wish I could see it every Easter!

It is graphic- very, very gory,that is why it is R rated. I also believe it is factual on that score. You can easily see that it was a Catholic who did the movie, yet it was easy for me to insert LDS doctrine in certain spots.

LDS stress more of his spiritual and emotional suffering in Gethsemane, and this movie didn't hardly show Gethsemane, but I knew that would happen before I actually saw the movie. My neighbor at the time was Catholic, and he and I had some pretty lively discussions regarding the atonement and Gethsemane.

This movie actually strengthened my testimony. It also made the atonement extremely clear to me.

I say go see it. The R rating is for the gore. You can easily put your hands over your eyes when they flog Christ- I did!

[skalenfehl]

I read the only review given to this movie at imdb.com, which I find interesting, however, judging from it and the above comments, I seriously doubt that I'd be able to get through it. Just thinking about it now gets me choked up. Here's the review:

"I'm an agnostic and have not been to church since I was a teenager so I didn't watch this movie for a "religious" experience. This is a great movie. It grabs you from the beginning and doesn't let you go. I like to be immersed in a film from beginning to end and not be aware of the fact that I am actually watching a movie. The Passion did that for me. The central point of this movie is to portray the magnitude of the suffering and sacrifice that Jesus willingly went through as a man (not a god or myth). My favorite scene in the movie is when Mary watches Jesus fall while carrying the cross and then there's a flashback to a scene of Jesus as a toddler falling while walking up some stairs. It was brilliant. It demonstrated in a gripping, emotional way that Jesus was suffering as a man both emotionally and physically.

This movie was as anti-Semitic as it was anti-Roman. These claims of anti-Semitism reminded me of the hue and cry over Pearl Harbor by some Asian groups. Sorry, but Japan did attack Pearl Harbor. Likewise, the Jews did have Jesus crucified.

Some these reviews pretend that this movie is mindless violence with no story. The violence is intense, but it's an integral part of the story just as it was in Saving Private Ryan. It's obvious that many reviewers intended not to like the movie from the get-go due to it's have a religious focus and not throwing in some tarnishing/controversial scenes like The Last Temptation did. It shouldn't be a sin to make a religious movie without pandering to some leftist agenda."

[MorningStar]

I bawled just when I saw Mary in the previews. I couldn't handle seeing that movie.

[michaela]

.....the only review given to this movie at imdb.com....

This movie was as anti-Semitic as it was anti-Roman. These claims of anti-Semitism reminded me of the hue and cry over Pearl Harbor by some Asian groups. Sorry, but Japan did attack Pearl Harbor. Likewise, the Jews did have Jesus crucified.

A renewed study of the passion narratives makes it clear that Jesus was crucified by the Roman authorities. Crucifixion was a Roman means of execution. Also in the the accounts of the Gospels it is the Jerusalem establishment, not "the Jews," who collaborate.

...The shift of emphasis from the Romans to the Jews is often explained by the need of Christianity to present itself as acceptable to the Roman authorities. A deeper reason may well be the theological need for understnding the passion as a fulfillment of the scriptures of the Jews and thus as an inner Jewish event. Yet there can be no historical doubt that Jesus was crucified under and by Pontius Pilate as Jewish threat to Roman Law and order.

When the New Testament and especially the gospel of John gives the impression that "The Jews" are the constant enemies and opponents, we must remember that both believers and unbelievers in the Jesus story are Jews. In order to make that more clear some translators choose to use words like "Judeans" or the "the Jewish leaders." One could even think of "the establishment," for there is really nothing especially Jewish in the attitudes of those leaders.

(From The Oxford Companion to the Bible, 1993, pp. 33-34.)

Even the Vatican has revised its position on Jesus being killed by the Jews. Please let's not perpetuate the inaccuracy.

Skalenfehl, I realize you are only quoting someone else. I just feel strongly, in view of the anti-semitism that still exists, we need to challenge these attitudes wherever and whenever they occur.

michaela

[skalenfehl]

I understand, michaela, and thank you for bringing that up. My purpose in the quote was to present a point of view of the content of the film and not necessarily the critics opinion of semetism or political view. One of my best friends, who, by the way has no religious views, accompanied his wife, who's LDS, to watch this movie in the theater when it was released and he described it as brutal and will never watch it again. I think it was too barbaric, even for him. Regardless, I don't think I could or ever will watch this movie.

[Fiannan]

Yes, it is brutal..but taking that into account drives the point home even mre about how much Jesus had to suffer for the entire plan of salvation to take place. Many men of history are admired but how many volunteered to undergo such a horrific death for the benefit of others? Likewise, most of the original apostles sealed their testimonies of Jesus in blood and endured horrible executions for the faith.

I had my teenagers watch it two years ago.

[pushka]

I watched the movie and found it extremely moving. Yes it was brutal, gory, uncomfortable to watch at those points, but as previously stated by other posters, the brutality was necessary for the effect of the movie upon its viewers.

I was especially moved by the effects of the suffering of Christ upon his mother, Mary...

Yes, it moved me to tears too..I would watch it again, however.

[kona0197]

It's funny how the Church does not support the film.

[skalenfehl]

I don't know of any movie supported by the church, though this isn't the only one about the life of Christ. The church has produced it's own films for various purposes, especially for missionary/evangelical work.

[pam]

I started watching the movie and found it far too graphic for my taste.

[skalenfehl]

My friend told me that it seemed quite realistically and historically well portrayed, I too, have a difficult time seeing people get maimed on tv. I seldom watch tv and if I were to watch this movie, I think it would be to hard to get through. I can appreciate that it was made, though.

[Ray A]

It's interesting to read Mel Gibson's apology to the Jewish community after his drunken outburst where he accused Jews of causing all the wars in history:

"There is no excuse, nor should there be any tolerance, for anyone who thinks or expresses any kind of anti-Semitic remark. I want to apologize specifically to everyone in the Jewish community for the vitriolic and harmful words that I said to a law enforcement officer the night I was arrested on a DUI charge. "I am a public person, and when I say something, either articulated and thought out, or blurted out in a moment of insanity, my words carry weight in the public arena. As a result, I must assume personal responsibility for my words and apologize directly to those who have been hurt and offended by those words. "The tenets of what I profess to believe necessitate that I exercise charity and tolerance as a way of life. Every human being is God’s child, and if I wish to honor my God I have to honor his children. But please know from my heart that I am not an anti-Semite. I am not a bigot. Hatred of any kind goes against my faith. "I’m not just asking for forgiveness. I would like to take it one step further, and meet with leaders in the Jewish community, with whom I can have a one-on-one discussion to discern the appropriate path for healing. "I have begun an ongoing program of recovery and what I am now realizing is that I cannot do it alone. I am in the process of understanding where those vicious words came from during that drunken display, and I am asking the Jewish community, whom I have personally offended, to help me on my journey through recovery. "Again, I am reaching out to the Jewish community for its help. I know there will be many in that community who will want nothing to do with me, and that would be understandable. But I pray that that door is not forever closed. "This is not about a film. Nor is it about artistic license. This is about real life and recognizing the consequences hurtful words can have. It's about existing in harmony in a world that seems to have gone mad."

One wonders why he uttered these anti-Semitic comments this in the first place. A drunk man often speaks the truth he doesn't when sober. Gibson's father believes the Holocaust never happened, and Mel Gibson has never repudiated this view of his father.

The film, by the way, has been analysed by theologians and numerous historical errors detected. They concluded that Gibson just took "artistic licence". A good critical review can be found here:

The Passion of the Christ - Challenge to Catholic Teaching

Note the conclusion:

For Gibson’s fans to polemicize that the film cannot be critiqued without rejecting the New Testament is to ignore history and to trivialize decades of official Catholic teaching on biblical interpretation. In some ways the movie is a direct challenge to that teaching. It also rejects the Holy Father’s solemn commitment at the Western Wall in 2000 to do penance for past Christian sins against the Jewish people by “seeking genuine fellowship with the people of the covenant.” Such fellowship cannot possibly rest upon the endorsement of a film that perpetuates hoary anti-Jewish images.

I realise that it has enormous emotional impact on many, who probably missed all these details anyway. I don't think it's a good thing to get emotional impact at the expense of historical truth, or historical records being given "artistic licence", when it comes to portraying a religion, or religious group, in such a negative way. Whether it's September Dawn, or The Passion. That's why I didn't bother to see either. Saving Private Ryan is a much more accurate portrayal of what happened on June 6, 1944. And we know the storyline is fiction.

[skalenfehl]

Very good post. Thank you for sharing. If I wasn't such a softy, I might be persuaded to watch it. It's just not for me.

[WANDERER]

No I haven't seen it...a bit too graphic a movie for me.....

but I did hear about the Mel incident and the racist and sexist comments he made to the arresting officers when pulled over and taken into custody. He didn't want to get in the police car and they ended up handcuffing him. In fairness here are his comments:

Gibson said 3 concerns may have led to his remarks: 1) the 2006 war in Lebanon which was in its 17th day 2) the general level of escalating violence in the Middle East as relating to Israel 3) those Jewish individuals who gave him a "brutal sort of public beating" over the making of The Passion of the Christ where he never heard a "single word of apology".

BTW He also allegedly claimed to "own" the city of Malibu, California.

I don't think alcohol and verbal accuracy go together.

[Ray A]

BTW He also allegedly claimed to "own" the city of Malibu, California.

I don't think alcohol and verbal accuracy go together.

The point here, Wanderer, isn't accuracy, it's what he really thinks, even if it isn't true.

[Ray A]

those Jewish individuals who gave him a "brutal sort of public beating" over the making of The Passion of the Christ where he never heard a "single word of apology".

And for this they are "pigs" who cause all the wars in history?

[NeuroTypical]

My wife and I saw it, we both cried, we didn't particularly feel the spirit. The movie did help us understand the atonement a bit more. Not because there was anything there we didn't already know, but because of the powerful impact left by witnessing the beaten and bleeding Christ dying on the cross.

LM

[Ray A]

I imagine not all Jews feel the same way, but for what it's worth here is the viewpoint of a Jewish Rabbi (it is kind of humourous too):

The Talmud famously says that a man is known in three ways. What he says when he is drunk, what he says when he is angry, and what he spends his money on. On all three counts, it appears that Mel Gibson has sadly shown his true colors. Upon getting arrested for drunk driving, in his inebriated state, he allegedly said something to the effect that “Fxxxxx Jews are responsible for all the world’s wars.” In his anger, he asked the arresting deputy if he himself was Jewish. And, of course, he spent $25 million dollars of his own money arguing that the Jews killed Jesus. Well, there you have it. Drink, anger, and money all lead Mel Gibson to alleged acts of anti-Semitism. Those of us who strongly opposed “The Passion of the Christ” as defamatory of Jews should feel no sense of vindication now that Mel has shown what he really thinks of Jews. On the contrary, this story is a tragedy all around. Who would have thought that in Hollywood of all places there could be personalities so filled with Jew-hatred? The tragedy is compounded by the fact that Mel Gibson largely established his career in the role of a white detective who has the warmest possible relationship with his black partner in the “Lethal Weapon” movies. Turns out that all along good ol’ Mel was a bigot.

Not that we should have been all that surprised, given the Holocaust-denying remarks Mel’s father has always made publicly, with Mel saying in his defense, “My father never lied to me.”

Still, there are a number of things to be learned from this sad event. Firstly, all those who defended “The Passion of the Christ” as a benign movie about the death of Jesus ought to do some real soul-searching. This defamatory movie repeated the oldest and most destructive lie ever told, that the Jews killed god. Millions of Jews throughout history have been murdered over this lie. And yet, when a modern movie appeared portraying the Jews as bloodthirsty and desperate to see a dead Jesus, it became one of the biggest box office successes of all time. Worse, so many of our evangelical brothers and sisters promoted the movie as a modern Christian triumph. Churches around the country who normally love and support Israel rushed to show the movie to their flocks, as if doing so were a sacrament. They defended Mel Gibson especially as having made a film that promoted Christianity rather than defamed Jews. I hope that they will now reconsider their attitude toward the film and stop showing it at churches, as it perpetuates the stereotype of Jews as perfidious Judases.

Likewise, I especially hope that the many Jewish conservatives who defended Mel Gibson and even heavily promoted the movie will rethink their support.

Rabbi Shmuley Boteach Not Surprised By Mel Gibson's Anti-Semitic Remarks, But They're Not Without Repair -- Beliefnet.com

[WANDERER]

it's what he really thinks, even if it isn't true (Ray quote)

Not sure that I know what other people are 'thinking'.

He didn't use the word pigs Ray. Interesting substitution.

[Ray A]

Not sure that I know what other people are 'thinking'.

He didn't use the word pigs Ray. Interesting substitution.

You're right about that. It was someone else who supported Gibson, and I confused his words with Gibson's, who actually only said:

...Jews are responsible for all wars in the world."

If you see "interesting substitutions", it's really only a mistake.

[Ray A]

Not sure that I know what other people are 'thinking'.

I don't either, but when someone says, "Jews are responsible for all wars in the world", and calls a female police officer "sugar t***", alcohol excuses this? When someone hops into a car, over the limit, and kills a pedestrian while DUI, does alcohol excuse this? Gibson was DUI, and that alone should alert us to the sort of "responsible" person he is. By doing this, alone, shows that he has absolute contempt for society and its laws.

I work with drunk people all the time. I do it for a living. My tolerance level for them is quite low, but I endure it because it's a part of my job. I believe people do really say what they think when they are under the influence of a few tequilas. Oh, they often regret it, regret that they have let on to their true feelings.