A Pinoy Blog About Nothing

We watched The Passion of the Christ last Tuesday and the theater was packed. I don’t know how many went to watch the movie because of a) the hype generated Mel Gibson about it, b) genuinely wanted to watch yet another movie about Jesus, or c) it’s their form of penitence for Lent (oh you know who you are).

I fall in the first category. I wanted to see what’s the fuss was about. My impressions (caveat-I’m talking about this in the context of the movie, okay?):
a) I don’t see why it’s deemed anti-Semitic by some sectors because, hey, if you pay attention not all of the Jews were frothing at the mouth and condemning Jesus. Sure, the Romans got off lightly but I really think the depiction was mainly of the Caiphas being jealous and threatened by this carpenter who’s turning the traditional laws upside down.

b) The production value is great. Mel Gibson was really passionate about this project and it shows. I think it’s the best movie Gibson has made as a producer and director. Even Braveheart, which if you pay close attention, has some goofs. The Passion showcases some flourishes from director Mel I’ve never seen before in his past movies.

c) The cast was sympathetic. Jim Caviezel (JC, get it?) was believable in the interpretation of a screen version of Jesus Christ. He got lost in the role, with the help of a nose prosthetic, raised hairline and digitally re-colored eyes. It was a nice change of pace for Monica Bellucci, although there were shades of Malena in there. Maia Morgenstern, the actress who plays Mary, was wonderful and steals every scene she’s in.

d) It contained violence I expected a Mel Gibson movie. Do I think it was gratuitous? No. Do I agree with movie critic Roger Ebert that it was the “most violent [movie] I have ever seen?” No. I think there are more violent movies out there. I think it’s all in the matter of putting it in context. (If you’ve read more about the punishments done by the Romans on their enemies, I bet it’ll even make Mr. Mad Max’s toes curl.)

I think The Passion would be a Lenten favorite along with DeMille’s Ten Commandments. Gibson deserves the rewards and praises he has received for making this movie. It was a gutsy move on his part to make this movie and his hardwork is paying off.

Ok, so much for the movie.

In the theater I was seated next to a woman who was sobbing and clicking her tongue every time the Romans scourge JC on the screen. Call me a cynic but that really bothered me. Am I that jaded a moviegoer that I wasn’t moved by the images on the screen?

And before anyone goes all righteous on me, let me explain that I’m the type of person who believes that spirituality and communion with the Creator doesn’t have to happen in ‘designated places of worship’. Just because Gibson tells me Caviezel is Jesus doesn’t mean I’ll take it as Gospel truth. In the end, it’s only a movie. I think over emphasis on rituals and symbols whether — Catholic, Muslim, Buddhist etc — distracts us from the whole point. Respect them sure, but don’t forget what they’re about. In the end, I think we shouldn’t confuse the message with the medium or the messenger. (On a somewhat related topic, Dean Jorge Bocobo has a post about how Pinoys celebrate…er…observe Holy Week. Great pictures too. Hilarious.)

(And oh yeah — the only thing totally historically inaccurate about the movie for me was that Judas didn’t look like Rez Cortez, Jovit Moya or Ben David.)