Attacking The Passion

I was incensed enough about this review at Salon for “The Passion of the Christ” to write a Letter to the Editor. You’ve read my review and know that I liked it. If Cintra Wilson (or her interviewee, Father Stanger) didn’t like the film I wouldn’t be upset, but the open bias and low journalistic integrity of this article stuck in my craw.

Here’s what I wrote to Salon’s editors:

Cintra Wilson’s agenda over Mel Gibson’s movie is biased and will surely cast her in a bad light as more people see the film. I saw an early cut of this film in Austin and spent 90 minutes listening to Gibson’s Q&A. His “agenda” for this film, contrary to Wilson’s paranoia, is the best form of any religous believer: Tell the story as you believe it and let the viewer decide. Mel Gibson doesn’t proselytize with this film and he leaves the viewer plenty of room to decide the level of fiction contained within.

Associating “The Passion of the Christ” with the evangelical Outreach program of an individual church and presenting them as Gibson-sanctioned is simply yellow journalism. I can empathize with Wilson’s hatred for large churches, but extending that hatred to this film is being vitriolic. Wilson identifies a couple of churches who have charasmatically embraced this film while ignoring the secular embrace of one of the most active online movie communties (aintitcool.com). It would take very little research to know that Gibson has screened this film for many audiences regardless of religous cross-sections — and they almost all liked the film.

I don’t know where Father Stanger received his information about the the last days of Jesus, but this film portrays the bible’s version of the events accurately. If they aren’t “factual” they are the closest we will ever come to knowing the facts until time travel is perfected. Father Stanger and Cintra Wilson, also, reveal their agena by pointing out the violence and slow-developing story line. The violence intrinsic to the gospel’s portrayal of these final days is unavoidable. Previous film makers have been hampered by societal values around the subject of violence and Gibson takes full advantage this modern age allows him without taking liberties about the effects a cat-o-nine-tails would evince. Using his own mother’s words, Stanger calls the film “plodding” but by taking the time to follow the brutal physicality of Jesus’s beating with the brutal psychological torment of the road to Golgotha, Gibson communicates the duality of Jesus’s torture. Maybe Wilson and Stanger (and Stanger’s mom) were hoping to catch Lethal Weapon 5.

The strongest (and strangest) inaccuracy in this article comes when Father Stanger is prompted by Wilson to say “The good guys speak English; the bad guys speak these other languages.” Take my word for it: No one in “The Passion of the Christ” speaks English. This phrase will be taken out of context by many readers — and those who can recognize the context will follow Father Stanger’s misinterpretation. Gibson in no way is suggesting that Vikings are evil and that anyone who doesn’t speak English is evil. That is purely Father Stanger’s bias against Mel Gibson showing through in it’s ugliest fashion.

I don’t know why Wilson and Stanger are collaborating to attack this film and Mel Gibson. I am most troubled by Father Stanger’s particularly un-Christian behavior towards fellow human beings. Calling out a group of evangelical Chrstians as “red-neck” and suggesting they are racist is catty and hate-filled. Father Stanger thought the film glanced over “Love your neighbors” while he has forgotten the same sentiment in this interview.

“[Wilson:] So you didn’t feel like it was going to be a tool of great conversion or anything.”

“[Sanger:] No, not at all.”

Good. Gibson is pretty clear that he didn’t want to make a tool of conversion. He would be happy that Father Stanger feels assured he has not.

“[Wilson:] What would be your advice for would-be moviegoers?”

“[Stanger:] I’d say don’t bother.”

Do bother. It is a fine film telling an ancient story. This is a gorgeous work of art and if you are inclined to disagree with Christianity, feel free to approach is as a work of fictional art. Gibson won’t mind and you won’t miss out on great art.

Posted by etrigan at January 27, 2004 7:38 AM