Sunday, February 22, 2004
More on The Passion - see my previous post
My comments must be tempered by the fact that I have not yet seen the movie.
However the more I hear about it the more disturbed I become. This movie seems almost too well hyped.
The marketing appears to have been carefully manufactured, and criticism limited or simply ignored.
Yet I have found numerous instances of well thought out criticisms of the movie, including the fact that the movie makers claims about its historical accuracy and its biblical accuracy are probably incorrect.
The hype from a Christian perspective appears to be along the lines of "this is a great evangelism tool". Why do we need a tool like this? Why can't we evangelise without a movie? Can we only evangelise well when something like this comes along. What happens next year when it is all forgotten again? The Oberammergau Passion Play has been performed 40 times in the last 4 hundred odd years and is well known throughout the world.
The first of my two reasons for being disturbed about this movie is the violence. This film has been rated MA15+here in Australia. That means I cannot take my children to it - even if I choose to - PG (Parental Guidance). Why does the violence have to be so graphic and disturbing? Sure it is fairly hard to recreate the bloody and torturous death of an individual "nicely". But the emotion that the use of cinema violence gernates in someone is hard to ignore, and is a well used cinematographic method. Our society is so well conditioned to violence, that maybe the only way to get at someone is to show more violent violence than normal.
Does the emotion that is generated from this movie lead to long lasting conversion and repentance from sin? Maybe - that is for an individual to answer. I know from personal experience of both myself and friends that emotionally charged events where "altar calls" are made can often lead to insubstantial and non lasting decisions.
I am also disturbed about the weighting of events. This film primarily focuses on the suffering of Jesus, in fact the last 12 hours of his life and subsequent death. Mel Gibson has made this decision consciously and has ignored events leading up to and after this point. He is entitled to do that as a film maker and I have no problem with that. However the death was only part of the bigger picture. In fact without the death the resurrection was not possible, yet to focus on the death without the resurrection, which was the point of the death in the first place is neither biblically nor historically accurate. We must be careful as both movie viewers and evangelists to point out that this movie is only the first part of a bigger picture.
The resurrection is the important part, and the part that lays a claim on someone's soul. Merely viewing Jesus' death - even understanding that it was your sin that put him there without looking at the resurrection, and the claim that lays on your life is like finishing a joke before the punchline - you miss the point!
I personally shall view the movie when I am able, if only to better critique it and make more informed comments. In the meantime, I am open to opinion and comment - especially from those who have seen the film.
Here are some links that I have used as research starting points. Thanks to Darren at the Living Room for the page that started this. I suggest that you read these pages before commenting blindly - there is a wealth of informed commentary and critique here.
Oberammergau
The Weekly Standard
Protestant, Catholic and Jewish review
Beliefnet review
Beliefnet - debate
Christian Answers
Boston.com News
FaithandValues
Study guide
Most Rev. Stefan Soroka Hype Versus Hope
James Dobson
Billy Graham quoted on World Net Daily I couldn't find the original article from Billy Graham himself
I was interested to see that while James Dobson did address media and topical "problems" with the film such as "will it inspire anti semitism?", he fails to address any of the theological or historical criticisms many of the other film reviewers have raised, in particular non biblical (not mentioned in the bible) additions made to the movie to fill it out, and the artistic license used to portray certain abstract concepts.
My comments must be tempered by the fact that I have not yet seen the movie.
However the more I hear about it the more disturbed I become. This movie seems almost too well hyped.
The marketing appears to have been carefully manufactured, and criticism limited or simply ignored.
Yet I have found numerous instances of well thought out criticisms of the movie, including the fact that the movie makers claims about its historical accuracy and its biblical accuracy are probably incorrect.
The hype from a Christian perspective appears to be along the lines of "this is a great evangelism tool". Why do we need a tool like this? Why can't we evangelise without a movie? Can we only evangelise well when something like this comes along. What happens next year when it is all forgotten again? The Oberammergau Passion Play has been performed 40 times in the last 4 hundred odd years and is well known throughout the world.
The first of my two reasons for being disturbed about this movie is the violence. This film has been rated MA15+here in Australia. That means I cannot take my children to it - even if I choose to - PG (Parental Guidance). Why does the violence have to be so graphic and disturbing? Sure it is fairly hard to recreate the bloody and torturous death of an individual "nicely". But the emotion that the use of cinema violence gernates in someone is hard to ignore, and is a well used cinematographic method. Our society is so well conditioned to violence, that maybe the only way to get at someone is to show more violent violence than normal.
Does the emotion that is generated from this movie lead to long lasting conversion and repentance from sin? Maybe - that is for an individual to answer. I know from personal experience of both myself and friends that emotionally charged events where "altar calls" are made can often lead to insubstantial and non lasting decisions.
I am also disturbed about the weighting of events. This film primarily focuses on the suffering of Jesus, in fact the last 12 hours of his life and subsequent death. Mel Gibson has made this decision consciously and has ignored events leading up to and after this point. He is entitled to do that as a film maker and I have no problem with that. However the death was only part of the bigger picture. In fact without the death the resurrection was not possible, yet to focus on the death without the resurrection, which was the point of the death in the first place is neither biblically nor historically accurate. We must be careful as both movie viewers and evangelists to point out that this movie is only the first part of a bigger picture.
The resurrection is the important part, and the part that lays a claim on someone's soul. Merely viewing Jesus' death - even understanding that it was your sin that put him there without looking at the resurrection, and the claim that lays on your life is like finishing a joke before the punchline - you miss the point!
I personally shall view the movie when I am able, if only to better critique it and make more informed comments. In the meantime, I am open to opinion and comment - especially from those who have seen the film.
Here are some links that I have used as research starting points. Thanks to Darren at the Living Room for the page that started this. I suggest that you read these pages before commenting blindly - there is a wealth of informed commentary and critique here.
Oberammergau
The Weekly Standard
Protestant, Catholic and Jewish review
Beliefnet review
Beliefnet - debate
Christian Answers
Boston.com News
FaithandValues
Study guide
Most Rev. Stefan Soroka Hype Versus Hope
James Dobson
Billy Graham quoted on World Net Daily I couldn't find the original article from Billy Graham himself
I was interested to see that while James Dobson did address media and topical "problems" with the film such as "will it inspire anti semitism?", he fails to address any of the theological or historical criticisms many of the other film reviewers have raised, in particular non biblical (not mentioned in the bible) additions made to the movie to fill it out, and the artistic license used to portray certain abstract concepts.
