Film Forum: The First Official Passion of the Christ Reviews … and 50 First Dates
Moviegoers must wait a few more days for The Passion of the Christ, but the reviews are already coming in. Plus: Mel Gibson talks to PrimeTime, and the Passion debates continue. Meanwhile, Adam Sandler and Drew Barrymore have 50 First Dates, and one Christian film critic wonders why viewers are ignoring Peter Pan.
By Jeffrey Overstreet | posted 2/01/2004 12:00AM

2 of 4

Mel Gibson takes the stand on the 'PrimeTime' of The Christ
On Monday night's edition of ABC's television news program PrimeTime Live, Diane Sawyer blinked in what seemed like astonishment as Mel Gibson assured viewers that, yes, he really does believe Jesus is the Son of God, the savior of the world.
Gibson also responded to those who call him anti-Semitic. "To be anti-Semitic is a sin," Gibson stated emphatically. "To be anti-Semitic is to be not Christian."
He revealed that the controversial line spoken by Jews in the film—"His blood be on us and on our children" (Matthew 27:25)—would not appear in subtitles, so as not to provoke misunderstandings of how that line should be interpreted. Those words can be heard, however, by viewers who do not require subtitles.
Gibson also assured us that he would not add a printed message at the end of the film dissuading viewers from behaving hatefully toward the Jewish people. "That assumes that there is something wrong with my film for me to do that, and I don't think there is."
Responding to statements like those made by Anti-Defamation League's Abraham Foxman, who said he believes the film "has the potential to fuel anti-Semitism, Gibson asked us to consider other films that could be accused of the same thing. Is Schindler's List anti-German? Has that film turned viewers against the German people? He qualifies that the Romans and the Sanhedrin were responsible insofar as they were "the material agents of [Christ's] demise." And he reminded us that there were no Norwegians present at Christ's death.
In an attempt to make it clear that he considers himself—and all of humankind—responsible for Christ's death, Gibson revealed that the left hand we see holding the nail in place as it is pounded through Christ's flesh is, indeed, the director's own left hand.
For more on Gibson's interview, in which he discussed what led him to this project, see Bob Allen's summation at Ethics Daily and the overview of the interview at ABC News.
Six more days until
The Passion
's release, and the debates continue
In an article at The Matthews House Project (appearing late this week), Michael Leary makes his case for why The Passion is unique not only as a film, but specifically as a "Jesus film."
Leary writes, "This is another installment in a classic genre of film, but in this case the story of Jesus is being told in the language spoken most fluently by contemporary culture: the image. If anything, The Passion of the Christ will be a great test case for the possibility of rendering of truly Christian language in the medium of conversation that most people these days are comfortable with."
Meanwhile, the uniquely intense protests against the film continued to lead some hysterical journalists into extreme and outrageous behavior that, in one case, was a far more damaging blow to credibility of the writer than it was to its intended target.
Roger Friedman published a story at FoxNews claiming that Mel Gibson was deliberately trying to prevent the movie from showing in neighborhoods with heavy Jewish populations. Soon after the story appeared, his poor research and sensationalism were hit hard by other Internet journalists.
"Sometimes, a journalist makes a mistake," says David Poland at Movie City News. "And sometimes, a journalist makes a mistake that is so heinous and easily remedied by any fact checking that the person's publisher deserves to be threatened with litigation and the person in question deserves to lose their job. … This is, in entertainment journalism, as serious a breech of professional ethics as any I can ever recall."