A colleague wrote:
I do think that the world has moved on to other things and that the Gibson movie, at least on the American scene, has come and gone without causing any horrible repercussions. The only negative is that we will see a lot of cheesy bible-based movies coming out trying to pull in the same kind of $.
Today [Sunday, March 28, 2004] is the first full day since before the release of the Gibson film that it has not been one of the stories followed by "Google News. Of the various memes listed there this one has had significantly more traction than most. There have been (on slow days) fifty stories a day from around the world. (If you have a persistent (broadband) connection, I suggest you keep your browser open to Google News. You'll have a constant idea of what's moving and shaking the world.)
The story has mutated a few times (and, I expect will continue to) for quite some time to come. We might see it flow under the surface for a while, but it will be with us for a long time. Similar to the way in which "Men are from Mars and Women are from Venus" (i.e. you can sit beside one another in a theater and see two different movies), Jews and Christians see two different movies as well.
In the article, author John Leo reports on the Institute for Jewish and Community Research poll that suggests the movie has a positive repercussion, actually reducing anti-Semitism. I stand by my comment: "[the] carefully crafted depictions form the ground from which grow viewers' understandings of the deeper meanings of the characters and the story."
Consider the following (I can't list everything. I've collected nearly 400 Web page articles (as Safari documents (I don't know how they'll open in other tools but you should at least be able to get the text out.)). Some of these have "Google ads" to other related sites. I can share the articles with anyone who wants to do research on the subject. I hope to post the headline/tagline/URL to most of them on my Web site. I'll let you know when that's ready):
A. The film opened in Europe, England, Australia, South Africa, Singapore and the Arab world (more on this below) only this week. It opens in Italy on April 7.
B. Easter has not yet come and a story on msnbc.com (sometimes inaccessible from its own URL) asks
Has 'The Passion' caused miracles? (March 25, 2004)Makers of "Changed Lives: Miracles of the Passion" have been interviewing people who say their lives were turned around after they watched the flick. An online solicitation sent to would-be subjects of the film gives examples of the sort of "miracles" the filmmakers are looking for: "a marriage being rescued, an addict who was set free, a Jew who now accepts Jesus as Messiah, someone who experienced physical or emotional healing, and so on."[Hah, you could be a miracle if you accept Jesus as the Messiah after watching the film!]
A variant of this story has appeared in about ten other outlets. Just in case you're interested, here's the group recording (and testing?) the miracles.
I have a faint recollection of seeing the Jew accepts Jesus line on that Web site when I first checked it, but it seems to have been removed.
They plan a TV special to be aired at Easter. Just you wait.
How many of you have seen large red and black signs out in front of your neighborhood Evangelical churches? They read: "The Passion of The Christ -- True or False?" - then somewhere else on the sign it invites you to come on Easter.
A CNN story (I can't get to) states: Passions running high for Jesus wigs; BuyCostumes.com credits Gibson's blockbuster movie for an 87% spike in sales of its Jesus costumes. By Parija Bhatnagar, CNN/Money staff writer.... (I didn't know people wore costumes for Easter. I thought it was just those bonnets.)
C. The magazine Christianity Today devoted its March 2004 issue to the subject: The Passion of Mel Gibson with stories (listed on the cover: Why Evangelicals Are cheering a 'Catholic' Film; Michael Medved on the Politics of The Passion; The Long History of Passion-Centered Prayer). Their Web site has more material (for example):
Why some Jews fear the Passion
As a monthly, we can expect the correspondence to appear in the April and (more likely) May issues.
D. How will the movie play out in the Arab world?
I already reported on the article in Al-Jazeera [HUCALUM Digest 4625 March 1] which ends (in part):
The continued attacks on the Mel Gibson film prove this point. It should be clear to all Christians that it is nothing less than a rejection of the teachings of Christianity and obviously another rejection of Christ by organized Jewry -- the modern Pharisee. What is it that organized Jewry fears about this movie? Could it be that the movie depicts truth and shows how organized Jewry operates from behind the scenes to undercut perceived threats to its power structure?
Does anyone notice a "set-up" here?
On March 20 (or 19th? the story appears on the 20th) -- in at least six versions (ABC, Reuters, The Australian, The Jerusalem Post (via the AP), The Calgary Sun (via the AP), The Globe and Mail (Toronto)) Yasser Arafat watched the film on a DVD. (Was it a bootlegged copy? No sources report. Did Gibson send Arafat a copy (if so why)? If Gibson did not send it, who stole it for him and why did they want Arafat to watch the movie? What other movies does Arafat make a point of seeing *and commenting on*?)
I'll conflate the reports here (my comments are in [brackets]).
After watching it with "a top aide, who [it's not clear here to whom this "who" refers] compared Jesus' pain during crucifixion to Palestinians' suffering in the conflict with Israel. 'The Palestinians are still daily being exposed to the kind of pain Jesus was exposed to during his crucifixion,' Abu Rdeneh said afterward." [Arafat the historian!] "hailed the film as 'moving and historical'". [Alternatively, he said it] "was 'historic and impressive'". [Also, the authority on anti-Semitism...] "'The president did not feel the film was anti-Semitic,' said Hanan Ashrawi, a prominent Palestinian Christian who watched it with him on a DVD copy."Then, no more than a couple of days later (I'll make up my own headline), "The Jewish Authorities Killed the Spiritual Leader of the Rebel Forces." (Sound familiar?)
Elsewhere, the film opened on March 21 in Qatar, the first Gulf Arab state to publicly screen it. "We submitted The Passion of the Christ to the censorship committee, which had no objection to its screening," in Qatar, said Abdul Rahman Mohsen, the director general of a private Qatari cinema company. The film will be shown to the public in the UAE beginning on March 31 after being given the green light by the ministry of culture and information. Already (according to a headline in the Gulf News of March 21): "Mel Gibson's movie on Christ set to stir passions in UAE".
In another article you can read about the "Passionate portrayal of historical fact" by Dr Ezzedin Ibrahim who is the "Cultural Adviser to the Presidential Court of the United Arab Emirates"
E. After Easter, wait fifty days and you'll get a new rush of interest in the movie at Pentecost.
F. Articles have already begun to appear (as my colleague suggests) playing the "coat-tails" card. (Whoa , what a mixed metaphor that was!) "The Cash-In Of The Christ --? Success Of 'Passion' Has Hollywood Praying For More Profit". Now, read "Jews" where it says "Hollywood" and you see another mutation of the meme and a new series of stories.
G. We've seen that Gibson and Foxman are pushing each others' buttons already in relation to Gibson's desire to make a movie about the Maccabean revolt. I can't wait to see how that one plays out. Who do you think he'll get to be his historical authorities? What Jews will work with him? Is it to our benefit to blackball him, or, give him good information? I want to see how he films Eliezer killing the elephant [Check that source!], or Hannah and her seven sons. This movie will be great.
H. The story's being followed in the non-Jesus centric world. Why is India interested?
I. When do Oscar nominations come out for 2004? In what categories will (or will not) the film get nominated? Don't think for a moment there won't be tremendous debate about it one way or the other. And then, when the awards themselves are announced once again the whole issue will be reopened.