"What does the film have to prove, say and what are your opinions one way or the other."
Well that differs based upon whether you are approaching it from a writerly perspective (what did Gibson mean to say and how effectively did he say it) or a readerly perspective (what meaning does the viewer impart to the work).
Looking at the former, I think the biggest question is "why did Gibson make the movie so violent?" I think two lines of dialogue from the movie answer this question.
First, in an early scene, Satan states "No man can carry such a burden." Gibson then attempts to depict, through visuals, the immense weight that Jesus has chosen to carry. This is one of the central themes of the work.
He does this through physical suffering. Some would say he chooses a crude and unsubtle way to illustrate the burden; but I don't think it is any different than, for example, Aronofsky's depictions of the horrors of drug addiction in "Requiem For A Dream," which while arguably more "artful" was no less horrifying and cruel.
The second important line of dialogue is spoken by Jesus: "Forgive them Father, they know not what they do."
This is spoken after the worst of the abuse. I believe that what Gibson intended to do, by piling on the abuse, is to illustrate the vast depths of Jesus's willingness to forgive and his love of mankind. Here has has just suffered the most horrifying abuse imaginable, and his primary concern is to beg God to forgive his tormentors for what they have done.
So I think those are the two themes that Gibson really wanted to drive home: (1) the immensity of Jesus's sacrifice; and (2) the immensity of his willingness to forgive.
One can argue that Gibson could have used other methods to drive these points home, but I think it is inarguable that the method he chose proved very effective. |
