 |
Welcome |
 |
More about us |
 |
Diary & Information |
 |
Community Café |
|
Clubs |
|
Contact Us |
|
Movie pages |
BlogHere are the thoughts and news of the people in our community. Leave a comment as you wish. If you want to join the blogging ask Mark.
Friday, March 26, 2004The Passion of the Christ On Wednesday I got to watch The Passion of the Christ. UGC cinema put on a free showing for Church pastor's in Northampton [they deserve a bit of free publicity from that, probably]. So what do I think? Well, it is always weird going to the cinema at 11am at the best of times and this was no different. Especially considering the nature of the film. The first word that I would use is harrowing. It is certainly one of the most graphic, violent films I have seen. That needs to be made plain: it is not for the faint-hearted. But let's be honest, we have all watched Jesus of Nazareth and been offended by the crucifixion scene there because it has very little relation to gruesome reality. There is no chance of that offence here. The audience is barraged with gruesome and bloody scenes for 80% of the film. The film felt long and drawn out, like 12 hours of suffering with an inevitable conclusion. I came out in emotional turmoil, drained, messed up. But I think I would prefer this presentation to its relatively clinical predecessors. I have spent my upbringing persuading my parents of the 'necessary' violence in certain movies in order to portray reality [Saving Private Ryan] or the 'artistic' nature of violence that is required to make a point [Pulp Fiction; T1 & T2?]. And if those arguments are made then they are also to be made here. I should add that, personally, I feel it is over played though - blood just doesn't run that freely!! I appreciated the real, human nature of the film. There is nothing like a pictorial portrayal of something that you have only read about, be it Lord of the Rings or The Miracle Maker etc. Here the reality of Jesus humanity is emphasised, the fear that engulfs him, the pain that he suffers, the compassion that remains present. I felt one of the most powerful moments of the film was Peter's denial, again you are faced with the reality of what he did and the potential for you to do the same. Points of drama were beautifully crafted, finding points of grace from Jesus amongst horror and desertion, such as the cutting off of the centurion's ear by Peter. Every character was carefully introduced to the main plot journey bringing a reality to the encounters. Flashbacks added to the overall picture, giving light relief from the suffering, and giving some context, a touch of purpose [that is of course apart from the ridiculous one about Jesus making a table - was that purely for comedy value?]. I was less satisfied with some historical aspects to the film. The comparative presentations of the Roman authorities and the Jewish authorities, I felt, were not as I see them. Pilate is presented to be a reflective, compassionate ruler, just desperate to keep the peace, talking openly with his wife, who is presented as a semi-Jesus Follower. This I think is overly flattering. The Jewish authorities are presented as being single-minded and proud, comfortable with entering the house of Herod and being around blood and the crucifixion site. I feel that this does not deal fully with the complicated political and cultural issues of the day. It is also clear that many of the decisions with regards the portrayal of those issues not covered in the gospels come not so much from a desire to provide an historical reconstruction, but to pull in various Catholic sources. For example, Veronica appears on the scene from the 6th station of the cross, the devil figure's temptations in the garden of Gethsemane are from Anne Catherine Emmerich's The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ. In fact she is also responsible for many of the details of the film [check more: interesting points; outline of the issues; list of items taken into the film; frequently asked questions]. There is not a problem with this, of course, as long as people are aware. Overall this film has, and is, impacting me hugely. Brian McLaren's article sums it up very well, I think, it is not a manipulation technique [although many will be challenged to think about it all]. Its value, for me, lies in the role it takes in my own Formation, and in that sense its value is proving to be high. I feel more aware of Jesus' suffering, I feel aware of the grace carried in it, I feel faced by the reality of the discipleship call, I feel challenged to make a passionate response of devotion to "my Lord and my God". Do I want to see it again? No, not for a long, long time ... P.S. See Rick Warren's interesting response to Brian here. P.P.S. Interesting quotes: - "I am a Christian and I am not so much against the movie but the merchandise that they are selling along with it, things like nail necklaces, How tacky and sick!" - random public [better leave the necklace with a cross hanging on it in the box then!] - "At least I have an answer to sanctimonious religious people who don't like my love for horror films now" - BBC reporter on BBC 24 tonight - "I love horror films ...... it's an exploitation film, and I love that .... so it's a good film in my book" - same BBC reporter P.P.P.S. Repentence follows Posted by: Mark | 7:36 pm |
|
