I don’t think I’ll be seeing it… ever.
Well, I feel somewhat awkward expressing my opinion here with only a dozen or so posts to my name (and all in the “media” forum), but here goes. This is in regard to what has been said of the Passion.
Firstly, at least from what I noticed of it, it is not nearly so violent as many make it out to be. Surely it is more so than any other Biblical movie ever made, but any violence in the Passion pales in comparison to an average Bruce Willis movie. A second thing that must be remembered is that people in this age are very much sensitised to violence. The whipping may seem extreme, but it must be remembered that it is being administered by a people that condemned others to bloody gladatorial contests to the death and, later, sentenced the followers of Christ to absolutely unspeakable tortures (like lighting them on fire, flaying, upside-down crucifixions…Marcus Aurilius, the nice seeming Emperor from Gladiator was one of those that carried out this harsh persecution). And even later, people were accostomed to watching blood and death in reality, as when the knitters sat all day beside the guillotines during the Reign of Terror. History is fraught with violence, after all. This movie is not unrealistic in this portrayal.
Now secondly, in regards to a shortcoming from a spiritual side…there is both a yes and a no answer to this. It may seem as though the physical suffering of Christ overshadows the spiritual, and yet how much can you truly show of spiritual suffering of this sort? It would be a difficult thing at best, and may be impossible. But how much more in the way of spiritual suffering can you show than someone crying “my God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”. To be forsaken by God would be ultimate despair, and I think in that cry the spirituality is fully realised. And there is a second thing, one which I think few know of, and that I heard from my father (who is, by the way, both a pastor and a professor of theology). I have heard him mention, though I hesitate to go into too much detail for I do not fully know of this myself, that there is a secondary source upon which Mel Gibson based the movie. Apparently there was a nun, 150 years ago I think, who had visions and wrote these down in some manner. It was on these that he based some of the elements, I believe, and brings in a rather interesting theological viewpoint that Gibson attempts to stress (and that most have only interpreted as love of gore). This is a theology that says that we are drawn to Christ through his suffering, and are redeemed through this; the sharing in the suffering is what leads to salvation. Do not quote me exactly on this, as on the theology I may be slightly mistaken, but I am close if nothing else.
Finally, I will say that I did not find the movie exceptionally moving. This might only be me, however, who is never moved to tears by movies or any such thing; there seemed to be more than enough people crying in the theatre. So go see the movie if you will, but if not it is still only a movie. As all movies, there is some subtlety and beauty in the written word of books that films cannot seem to duplicate fully.
Monty Python kicks arse again!
The Life of Brian is awesome (All Monty Python films are). And it is way better than Passion of Christ.
Even though I’ve only seen Life of Brian, and not Passion of Christ, I stand by my statement.
First, you’re taking this thread too seriously. Second, you’re confusing being spiritual with being religious. Third, now that spiritual/religios debate has started up, I’m outta here.
APRIL FOOLS!