Audience reception has often centred on or around issues of gender, race and sexuality – for example in Film Noir, the sub-genre is typically identified as a “male fantasy” and women are simply defined by “her sexuality” because audiences for this type of film were gendered male (Place, 1998, 47), therefore as a woman I would have a different audience response to that of a man. However, perhaps other audience demographics are equally as interesting to consider. I am going to examine audience responses in relation to religion. Mel Gibson’s stupendous yet infamous The Passion of the Christ is a film which sparked an abundance of controversy upon its release – “The blaze of publicity and controversy surrounding The Passion of the Christ, beginning while it was still in production and only intensifying on its release, has made it impossible to watch the film unaware of that context.” (Corley and Webb, 2004, 28). The 2004 biblical epic depicts the last twelve hours of Christ’s life; the film begins in the Garden of Gethsemane where Jesus prays after sitting the Last Supper. He must prove to resist the seduction of Satan. Jesus is later arrested and taken within the city walls of Jerusalem where he is savagely tortured and ridiculed ending with the announcement of Christ’s execution. Whilst the film enlightens the audience with flashbacks of His mother and His teachings, Jesus carries a large, wooden cross amidst horrendous throngs of mocking. Here, he is brutally crucified, however resurrects on the third day. Biblical scholars are a particular audience who have responded to the film negatively – “one striking phenomenon in the reactions to the film has been the extent to which biblical scholars have joined in with some of the most vicious of the film critics’ reviews.” (Corley and Webb, 2004, 28). Perhaps this is largely down to the portrayal of violence in the film as well as the extent to the narratives accuracy.
The whipping scene where Jesus is brutally scourged and abused by Roman guards is a perfect example of the heavy violence surrounding the film. He is presented with a crown of thorns which he wears during the torture. Krister Stendahl commented about the “obscene magnification of violence”, whilst John Dominic Crossan named it “the most savage movie I have ever seen.” (Corley and Webb, 2004, 34). Perhaps biblical scholars and the church responded negatively to the film as it goes against Christian values on violence – “Violence shall no more be heard” (Openbible.info, 2018); thus inevitably shaping their opinion. On the other hand, during the scene, Gibson does attempt to steer away from the violence – “Mel Gibson does not encourage the viewer to want to see more. All the time he is asking the viewer to turn away.” (Corley and Webb, 2004, 34). The extent of the violence depicted is weakened by the fact that the “camera itself cannot bear to look on and repeatedly draws away”, Gibson “realises that it is important not to show everything in graphic detail.” (Corley and Webb, 2004, 34-35). Instead the camera forces us to focus on other aspects, for example it cuts to a slow motion tracking shot of Satan. It is interesting to note that the camera chooses not to gaze, as many films are built upon certain gazes such as Laura Mulvey’s male gaze. However, there can be no denial of how the violence still shown is beyond explicit as “few will not find this deeply disturbing and very upsetting.” (Corley and Webb, 2004, 35). The scene shows metal whips which get caught on Jesus’ skin, tugging off pieces of tissue whilst he weeps in pain – this is only a small insight into this horrific scene. Consequently it is no surprise that Christians responded to The Passion of the Christ in such a harsh way, or specifically towards Hollywood and Gibson – “Your rich men are full of violence; your inhabitants speak lies, and their tongue is deceitful in their mouth.” (Openbible.info, 2018).
Along with the criticism of violence, biblical scholars and the church perhaps also target the level of accuracy in the film. Outside of this particular audience the films faithfulness to Scripture may not hold as much importance or issue, after all a film is meant to be “a creative and artistic expression – it is not a documentary.” (Corley and Webb, 2004, 172). It seems that biblical scholars may forget that Gibson must find a balance between staying true to Scripture and obtain a creative interpretation. Unfortunately due to the films controversy, this can easily be forgotten when considering the making of the film. Professor of Theology and Church History Samuele Bacchiocchi discusses the films controversy in his review Mel Gibson’s Slaughter of Christ – “The truth is that the movie is a gross misrepresentation of Christ’s Passion.” (Biblicalperspectives.com, 2018). He continues to state that “The movie is truly a blood bath, where Jesus’ body is constantly beaten, whipped, kicked, spit on, and slapped” as well as “from a biblical perspective, the movie contains numerous glaring errors.” (Biblicalperspectives.com, 2018). He lists the inaccuracies that catch his attention throughout the film: Gethsemane, the physical appearance of Satan and an unfair portrayal of Jews and Romans. Bacchiocchi begins by breaking down the portrayal of Gethsemane. The garden looks abandoned at the beginning of the movie looking like “a field in southern Italy, with dry grass and without the millenarian olive trees that are so characteristic of the Garden of Gethsemane in Jerusalem.” (Biblicalperspectives.com, 2018). Jesus is captured in the Garden by soldiers and he is beaten, however there is no reference to this in the Gospels – “We are simply told: “And they laid hands on him and seized him…” (Biblicalperspectives.com, 2018). Secondly, the physical appearance of Satan is very fascinating. Firstly, Satan is gendered; the fallen angel is a woman during the movie which could be a connotation from biblical origins. Women are historically seen as origins of temptation as Eve gave in to eating the forbidden fruit – “Greedily she engorged without restraint” (Milton, 1667, 9.791); in the film she is also in a black cloak with a “mime-white face” (Biblical perspectives.com, 2018). However, there are “no allusions in the Gospels regarding any physical appearances of Satan during the Passion.” (Biblicalperspectives.com, 2018). Finally there is the unjust illustration of Jews and Romans in the film: Gibson portrays them as “mean and sadistic” looking vicious and angry, they also show minimal compassion and mercy towards Christ looking like “hardened executioners with no empathy toward their helpless victim.” (Biblicalperspectives.com, 2018); by not portraying a balanced picture of good and bad amongst Jews and Romans it contributes to the controversy that this particular audience would respond with.
In conclusion, The Passion of the Christ conjures mass debate and controversy amongst audiences. Although The Passion of the Christ “will influence popular conceptions about Jesus” (Corley and Webb, 2004, 173), the particular audience of biblical scholars and the church, which the film inevitably appeals to, respond to the film very negatively and this assignment explores how that opinion could be shaped due to the demographics of the audience in question. Both the criticism of violence and accuracy shrouding the film are primary examples of how Gibson’s biblical-epic are rejected by its most important critics. As someone not hugely religious, it is interesting to note that I believe Gibson deserves fewer backlashes for his 2004 feature. When watching the film I do not think about the faithfulness to the Scriptures or if Satan is portrayed the same way as the Bible. Instead I believe Gibson’s film is his artistic expression and interpretation from the Gospel’s; however I cannot watch the film unaware of its controversial context, which is something very powerful. The spectrum of religion and ethnicity will always arise an unavoidable criticism that cannot be shaken due to the topics ongoing controversial debates, furthermore The Passion of the Christ remains effective on its biblical audience and we should salute Gibson for creating a piece of work that still generates such discussion almost fifteen years later.
Bibliography:
Biblicalperspectives.com. (2018). MEL GIBSON’S SLAUGHTER OF CHRIST. [online] Available at: http://www.biblicalperspectives.com/endtimeissues/passion_of_christ2.html [Accessed 20 Mar. 2018].
Corley, K. and Webb, R. (2004). Jesus and Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ. London: Continuum, pp.28-173.
Kaplan, E. and Place, J. (1998). Women in Film Noir. London: BFI Pub., p.47.
Milton, J. (1667). Paradise Lost.
Openbible.info. (2018). What Does the Bible Say About Violence?. [online] Available at: https://www.openbible.info/topics/violence [Accessed 20 Mar. 2018].
The Passion of the Christ. (2004). [film].
