The Passion of the Violence

My latest letter to The Age. I'd say it's unlikely to get published..:

Mel Gibson's epic "The Passion of the Christ" has created an interesting paradox over its violence.

The Pope may (or may not) have said of the film's accuracy that "it is as it was". (Though whether the Holy Father was at the Crucifixion is open to debate). Many critics have praised the film for its no holes barred approach to the death of Christ and the film has effectively erased the family friendly view that films of the past portrayed. American critic Roger Ebert says that "this is the most violent film I have ever seen". Few disagree.

So what justification is there for showing such violence on the screen? Is it okay because there is a message? Because it is “Our Lord” being portrayed?

I just wonder if there will be rumblings from the Christian right about other R-rated violent films that “have a message” in the future? Can we complain about movies and television violence anymore when the “most violent film I have ever seen” is about Christ himself?

Roger Ebert's review
IMDB listing of The Passion of The Christ