|
I was trying to remember which of the Gospels told the parable of the kitchen table. I've re-read them and there is no mention of Jesus building the world's first kitchen table. It happens in Mel Gibson's new film, "The Passion of the Christ."
I bring up the kitchen table scene -- which is meant as a light moment in between the scenes of horrific violence -- as it is symbolic of "The Passion"; Gibson, like the authors of the Gospels who used the source material in Mark, takes bits and pieces from the Gospels, borrows from the Passion visions of the nun Anne Catherine Emmerich, and adds his own interpretation to the story.
Prior to seeing "The Passion," I had a discussion with a Christian gentleman (I'm Jewish, by the way) and I expressed my reservation that Gibson would include the dialog from Matthew 27, verses 24-25, where the Jewish crowd cries out for the blood of Jesus to be on their hands and the hands of their children. The response I received was, "Why should Gibson change the Gospels to make Jews happy?" Which is a valid point. But I think the argument goes both ways: if Gibson shouldn't change the Gospels, he also shouldn't add to them.
The Passion of the Christ is a story that most people know, even non-Christians. The version Gibson presents is a bloody, anti-Semitic account of the last 12 hours of Christ's life.
The movie opens with Jesus (James Caviezel) in Gethsemane, and events unfold pretty much as told in the Gospels, with Judas (Luca Lionello) betraying Jesus to a large, bloodthirsty crowd of Jews, who are just itching to beat someone. And beat Jesus they do, which establishes right from the start that it was the Jews, not the Romans, that wanted to spill the blood of Jesus.
And oh, how it spills! Everywhere, great red puddles of blood. Caviezel's Jesus is essentially a walking punching bag to be abused and tortured. It's hard to gauge his performance as 95% of it is spent receiving various forms of torture.
The bloodthirsty crowd of Jews pummel Jesus on their way to another crowd of bloodthirsty Jews, the high priests. Soon a large crowd of bloodthirsty Jews has gathered, and everyone, it seems, wants Jesus dead.
Judas, meanwhile, having betrayed Christ, is tormented by a couple of Jewish children. Gibson turns the Jewish children into demons. Nothing symbolic there, eh, Mel? Eventually the demon Jewish children (the group grows to about 10 evil Jewish kids) chase Judas out of the city where he decides to hang himself.
Observing the events of the Passion silently is Satan. We know it's Satan because in one scene Gibson shows us a snake. This androgynous figure (Rosalinda Celentano) pops up every so often, silently mocking Christ. Another bit of dramatic license from Gibson.
The huge bloodthirsty crowd of Jews eventually brings Jesus to the Roman procurator, Pontius Pilate (Hristo Shopov) and demand that Pilate crucify Jesus. Pilate here is portrayed as a thoughtful, compassionate ruler (despite historic accounts of Pilate as a man who hated Jews and liked to see them dead) who cannot find any reason to punish Jesus. Pilate sends Jesus to King Herod (who, for reasons that are unclear, is dressed as a drag queen), and Herod sends Jesus back to Pilate, again stating that Jesus was innocent.
The Pharisees are very intent on seeing Jesus dead (as is the very huge crowd of Jews) and eventually convince the doubtful ruler to carry out the punishment. Pilate literally washes his hands of Jesus and Jesus is sent off to be crucified.
Gibson, apparently influenced by Stephen King, shows in graphic detail Jesus being tortured to death. Blood flies, skin is flayed, and limbs are broken. It just goes on and on and on. Gibson's camera helpfully shows much of the carnage in slow motion. Gibson has created the world's first Christian snuff film.
The Roman guards that torture Jesus are portrayed as mindless brutes, and again Gibson shifts the blame of the death of Jesus to the Jews.
Lost in all of the bodily fluids is the message Jesus preached, which I think has something to do with love. As Gibson spends about two minutes of screen time total showing us flashbacks to Jesus preaching and his last supper, the message is lost in favor of scenes of a crow pecking out the eyes of one of the two thieves being crucified with Jesus, or shots of Jesus' ribs poking out through his flesh. And to think entire families will be seeing this movie. I'd hate to be the parent of a traumatized eight-year-old who has suffered through two hours of watching their beloved Jesus being tortured to death.
There's no denying the film's power; a number of people in the theater with me were crying throughout the film. The cinematography of Caleb Deschanel is at times breathtaking, and John Debney's musical score is rich with middle-eastern sounds and instruments. Gibson's actors speak in Aramaic and Latin, which is a pretty bold move for a director to take.
Make no mistake, this is a film by a Christian for a Christian audience. Anyone else is likely to be in the very least disgusted with the on-screen carnage and wondering why Jesus was put to death in the first place. The Gospels are not particularly accurate when it comes to portraying Jewish life during the time period Jesus was to have lived. The reason the high priests give to Pilate as to why Jesus should be executed is that he was guilty of blasphemy, by claiming to be the Messiah. Jewish law, however, does not consider a claimant to Messiah as someone who is guilty of blasphemy. Jewish history is filled with many claimants to the title of Messiah.
So, the Jews of the Gospels have no reason to have Jesus executed. The high priests may not have liked Jesus, but that wasn't enough to sentence him to death. Also, the Jews did not have the kind of power over the Romans that the Gospels say they did. In fact, Roman rule was brutal and the Jews were barely allowed to live life as Jews. Not that any of that matters to Gibson.
Is the movie anti-Semitic? I think it is. It just goes over the top in portraying Jews as wanting Jesus dead. It's so bad that we're expected to believe that the Jews would rather have a ruthless murderer, Barabbas, freed to their midst than to let Jesus live. It's clear the dialog from Matthew 27:25 is left in the movie; Gibson just had the caption removed.
Is Mel Gibson anti-Semitic? I don't know. I think he is on some level. This movie is his vision, a project he funded with his own money, a screenplay he helped to write, and a film he directed. Clearly, Gibson isn't going to go on Larry King and say, "Yes, Larry, I hate Jews." Whatever his view, The Passion is a troubling film, and there's no doubt in my mind that the film is going to cause anti-Jewish sentiment.
|