| |
|
|
Our staff went to see The Passion of
the Christ this past week. It features a very unflinching look at
the passion of Jesus from the agony in the garden to the resurrection.
Ill give you a few of my quick reactions to the movie...
Its style is very European. By that I mean
that the images of Christ and the others portrayed in the movie are very
much like European paintings of the Stations of the Cross over the past
few centuries. If youre expecting to see a Middle Eastern portrayal,
you wont.
While there are many historical inaccuracies and while the
movie necessarily leaves out aspects of some of the gospels (since the
gospels contradict one another in some places, one has to pick and choose
what to use if one is mixing the accounts together for a movie), the point
of the movie is not to show technically what happened, but to help the
viewer come face to face with the passion and suffering of Jesus. It works
therefore as work of art, not as a documentary. Like most art about the
death of Jesus, it shares the artists interpretation of the story.
For the most part, I was very moved by this art.
The movie is very violent only because the crucifixion is violent.
The violence portrayed is disturbing and if parents are thinking of bringing
their children, I suggest that the parents view the film first because
they know their children well enough to know how to prepare them to see
this film or whether their children are too young to see this. (The movie
is rated R.)
What I liked the best: in his passion Jesus gets strength from both his
Father and his mother.
What I liked the least: the characterization
of the Jewish leaders. Of course some Jewish leaders were active in the
passion of Jesus. But I felt that the movie pandered to stereotypes and
cast them in roles that go beyond what the scriptures tell us.
What Id hope for: a sequel! The passion
and death of Jesus is only part of the story. Lets have a movie
about the Resurrection and Pentecost!

|
|