Easter. It means different things to different people. For many it’s an excuse for some bank holidays and a chocolate egg (possibly with a character mug and some jelly tots), some will speak of the origins of the feast, being a celebration of the goddess Eastre and the Vernal Equinox (which, if nothing else, is a darned good name for a band), and Christians will find their mind turning to the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Christ’s last few days (known as The Passion) have been depicted on film and television numerous times. In fact, there is an episodic version being shown currently on BBC One, a co-production between the BBC, HBO, and Wardour Street production company Deep Indigo Productions.
Film versions can sometimes be controversial affairs with Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ, and Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ (based on Nikos Kazantzakis’s equally controversial novel) being particularly hotly debated, as well as the tale of non-Messiah Brian Cohen as told in Monty Python’s Life of Brian. Others seem to be almost designed to whip up controversy, such as Color of the Cross, which featured a black Jesus and suggested that His crucifixion may have been, at least in part, racially motivated. However, this production has passed with relatively little comment (with many reviewers suggesting that the idea is not actually all that controversial after all). The writer-director-star Jean-Claude LaMarre is having another go with the recently released DTV sequel Color of the Cross 2: Resurrection.
Gibson’s film, The Passion of the Christ, while lauded by many devout Christians, and Catholics in particular, drew criticism from Jewish viewers, who saw the film’s interpretation of the gospels as anti-Semitic.
The dialogue is spoken in a number of dead languages, largely Latin and Aramaic, although some characters speak Hebrew. Gibson’s original plan for the film was to present it without subtitles, believing that they would not be necessary and that the performances would provide ample context for the viewer. Eventually, though, he either changed his mind or was over-ruled and subtitles were prepared for the finished product. Language scholars have attacked the language used in the film as being full of basic errors and in many cases being applied in ways that make no sense (Jewish characters speaking Latin, for example).
A controversy more pressing to the general audience is the sheer level of violence in the film. The scourging of Christ being expanded from its passing mention in the gospels to being the centrepiece of the film - as such it’s an infinitely more violent film than, say, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. It could be argued, however, that the mention in the Gospels is merely descriptive and that Gibson’s vision is far more appropriate; yet some were still shocked at the gory imagery realised on screen. In fact, much of the film has been expanded in this way, where the Bible claimed that upon Christ’s death, the curtain in the Second Temple of Herod was torn apart. Gibson’s film depicts the entire temple being bisected by an earthquake. Divergance of this nature is largely caused by Gibson referring not only to the familiar Bible texts, but also additional works, prominently St. Anne Catherine Emmerich’s The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ.
There has also been a lot of talk generated by a scene - intended as comic relief - in which Jesus, being a carpenter by trade, creates a modern four-legged table for a customer, while Mary tells Him that it will “never catch on”. This has led to many humorous wags claiming that the film suggests that Jesus invented the table.
The most notable reaction I had to it personally was (apart from the repeated use of slow motion) that I nearly laughed out loud at the mention of the Sanhedrin, the Jewish court system - purely because, through my lack of knowledge, I had only encountered the term as the name of a fictional headache remedy advertised by Bill Bixby in the comedy film The Kentucky Fried Movie.
For all its controversial content, though, it has to be noted that many were profoundly moved by the film, which prompted an amazing number of people to come forward and confess to crimes that they had ostensibly got away with.
If you do feel like celebrating the Easter period with a movie, but feel that The Passion of the Christ may be too much for your sensibilities and The Greatest Story Ever Told a bit too Hollywood (and 225 minutes might press your schedule too much, despite the obvious Donald Pleasence benefits), then you could do far worse than Pier Paolo Pasolini’s 1964 film “The Gospel According to St. Matthew“. Pasolini himself was an atheist and so sought only to tell the tale, without preaching or trying to convert, frequently using the text of the gospel itself as the script. It’s also noted for its eclectic soundtrack, fusing Prokofiev and Bach with unexpected turns from the likes of Billie Holliday and Blind Willie Johnson.
Unusual it may be, but this unflashy approach led to the film being widely praised by Catholic leaders and appears on a list of films approved by the Vatican that they feel express religion, morals or art to a high standard. Then again, that list also approves The Lavender Hill Mob. So I think I’ll watch that instead.
Happy Easter!
