too much passion
So I'm not really holding in my feelings about The Passion of Christ and how the uber-violence of the movie pisses me off and all that stuff I wrote about the other night. Problem is, people's responses piss me off anymore.
Today, having found myself in a circle of people discussing the movie at work. I mentioned how impossible it was that Jesus, who was after all fully human, could have taken even a quarter of the beating that he does in the mvie. I was told that maybe I believed but didn't have faith and that's why I have a hard time with the movie. I shocked myself...and walked away with a smile when all I was doing inside was wanting to tell the fucker to go to hell and then do one thing or another to expedite his journey there. I hate that holier-than-thou shit. I hate it. HATE HATE HATE it. It's why I don't go to church after all, the reason that I hate my uber-"christian" alma mater and all the sanctimonious mother-fuckers that make up 98% of the alumni too for that matter. I was told once in college that I wasn't christian because I didn't go to church on weekend. I wanted to beat the living shit out of the guy that said that too.
But I've strayed from the point....
The point that I want to make about the movie is that it's overly violent. Considering it's about a guy who taught about peace and love and aimed at an audience that abhors violence (and naughty words and bits -- but those aren't a factor here) in the movies these days I think it's rather self-defeating. I mean, so many people come out of it remembering the scourging and the bloodiness more than anything else that it detracts from the real discussion. Roger Ebert called it the most violent movie he ever saw and, considering he's seen most evey movie ever made I'm sure, that's saying a lot.
Why are people so apt to defend something as being "the way it was" (as the Pope reportedly said) when so many people coming out of it remember little else than the violence? "But it's supposed to show the suffering that Christ went through" people might say...but what happens when the vioence is so outrageously over the top that it's not even real? What good does that do? I remember coming out of Kill Bill and thinking just how funny that movie was -- even though it too was extremely violent -- because of how over-the-top the violence was. That was my impression here too. Not to the same extent though, at least with Kill Bill it was purposefully over-the-top, cartoonishly over-the-top..in either case, it's not believable.
I don't know, it just really bothers me because the religious community has embraced this movie a little too tightly in my mind. If it is the case that maybe I don't have enough faith, that I'm just ignorant and maybe Jesus was not just human, but superhuman in His abilities to have His ass kicked so thouroughly for so long and still be able to walk (and for a short time burdan His own cross). Maybe that's what I gotta believe in to find the awe-inspiration that so many talk about...but I don't wanna. You know, I watched The Last Temptation of Christ a week ago, just because it received the same amount of hype as Gibson's Christ -- though in that case it was conservative Christians protesting against the movie -- and I jsut don't see why one is so evil and the other so good. Last Temptation's great sin, I guess, was that it delved too deeply into the humanness of Christ and protrayed Him as a sort of reluctant savior...whereas Passion seems to err on the opposite side of that coin, dwelling in the superhuman, Timex-like, abilities of Christ to endure tremendous amounts of pain, abuse, and loss of blood.
Personally, I would like to see a movie that explores Christ as a Human Being annointed by God as He was to be as God, protraying both sides of His holy being without the controversy of exageration or subjectivity of the filmmaker trying to make some sort of statement. Then again, that ain't never gonna happen...since all movies in the end are made by people and people aren't able to objectify their art like that. hmph.
Today, having found myself in a circle of people discussing the movie at work. I mentioned how impossible it was that Jesus, who was after all fully human, could have taken even a quarter of the beating that he does in the mvie. I was told that maybe I believed but didn't have faith and that's why I have a hard time with the movie. I shocked myself...and walked away with a smile when all I was doing inside was wanting to tell the fucker to go to hell and then do one thing or another to expedite his journey there. I hate that holier-than-thou shit. I hate it. HATE HATE HATE it. It's why I don't go to church after all, the reason that I hate my uber-"christian" alma mater and all the sanctimonious mother-fuckers that make up 98% of the alumni too for that matter. I was told once in college that I wasn't christian because I didn't go to church on weekend. I wanted to beat the living shit out of the guy that said that too.
But I've strayed from the point....
The point that I want to make about the movie is that it's overly violent. Considering it's about a guy who taught about peace and love and aimed at an audience that abhors violence (and naughty words and bits -- but those aren't a factor here) in the movies these days I think it's rather self-defeating. I mean, so many people come out of it remembering the scourging and the bloodiness more than anything else that it detracts from the real discussion. Roger Ebert called it the most violent movie he ever saw and, considering he's seen most evey movie ever made I'm sure, that's saying a lot.
Why are people so apt to defend something as being "the way it was" (as the Pope reportedly said) when so many people coming out of it remember little else than the violence? "But it's supposed to show the suffering that Christ went through" people might say...but what happens when the vioence is so outrageously over the top that it's not even real? What good does that do? I remember coming out of Kill Bill and thinking just how funny that movie was -- even though it too was extremely violent -- because of how over-the-top the violence was. That was my impression here too. Not to the same extent though, at least with Kill Bill it was purposefully over-the-top, cartoonishly over-the-top..in either case, it's not believable.
I don't know, it just really bothers me because the religious community has embraced this movie a little too tightly in my mind. If it is the case that maybe I don't have enough faith, that I'm just ignorant and maybe Jesus was not just human, but superhuman in His abilities to have His ass kicked so thouroughly for so long and still be able to walk (and for a short time burdan His own cross). Maybe that's what I gotta believe in to find the awe-inspiration that so many talk about...but I don't wanna. You know, I watched The Last Temptation of Christ a week ago, just because it received the same amount of hype as Gibson's Christ -- though in that case it was conservative Christians protesting against the movie -- and I jsut don't see why one is so evil and the other so good. Last Temptation's great sin, I guess, was that it delved too deeply into the humanness of Christ and protrayed Him as a sort of reluctant savior...whereas Passion seems to err on the opposite side of that coin, dwelling in the superhuman, Timex-like, abilities of Christ to endure tremendous amounts of pain, abuse, and loss of blood.
Personally, I would like to see a movie that explores Christ as a Human Being annointed by God as He was to be as God, protraying both sides of His holy being without the controversy of exageration or subjectivity of the filmmaker trying to make some sort of statement. Then again, that ain't never gonna happen...since all movies in the end are made by people and people aren't able to objectify their art like that. hmph.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home