“Religion
Today”
by Richard N.
Ostling
(AP, September 4, 2003)
Mel Gibson take
note:
There's another new film about the life of Jesus that also depicts Jews'
involvement in the events leading to the Crucifixion. But this one has
several
Jewish producers and has attracted much less
controversy.
While Gibson's
"The
Passion" won't be released for months, Jewish and Christian
commentators
already are debating whether its gory treatment of Jesus' death will rouse
anti-Semitism. By contrast, there's no advance acrimony surrounding
"The
Gospel of John," which premieres at the Toronto International Film
Festival on a symbolically chosen Sept. 11.
"John" is
a
Canadian-British production made for $15 million, roughly half the cost of
Gibson's film. It opens in four U.S. markets Sept. 26, then 75 others
through
the autumn, mostly in cinemas across the southeastern Bible
Belt.
Gibson's movie,
which he
funded, co-wrote, produced and directed, puts all the dialogue into the
ancient
Aramaic and Latin languages. "John" has a different oddity. The
script is in English but consists entirely of John's Gospel, word for
word.
Yet that verbal
straitjacket doesn't sap the drama and sometimes enhances it, creating
thought-provoking entertainment.
Still, thanks to
Gibson's
film, many will be less curious about whether "John" is a good
show
than how it treats first-century Jews. Answer: Just the way John's Gospel
does,
which raises age-old issues of fairness and literary
intent.
Garth Drabinsky, the
Canadian producer who heavily shaped "John," is Jewish. He
thinks
John's Gospel, which most scholars believe was written around the end of
the
first century, is an inspirational masterpiece in which one of the themes
is
the conflict over Jesus among Jews.
The John film
"will
illuminate understanding of both religions, and make a stronger
Christian-Jewish relationship," declares Drabinsky, a colorful
impresario
who is fighting U.S. and Canadian fraud charges in an entirely unrelated
matter. (That case stems from the 1998 bankruptcy of Livent, a firm he
co-founded, that turned out a string of hit Broadway
shows.)
In making the film,
Drabinsky hired University of Toronto retiree Peter Richardson to enlist
an
advisory board of scholars consisting of five Protestants of varying
views, a
Roman Catholic sister and two Jews.
One of the Jewish
scholars, Alan Segal of Barnard College, told a Toronto media preview that
"it's a stunning and illuminating film." But Segal also
acknowledged
that, of the four Gospels, John is "the most Jewish in its subject
matter,
and the most anti-Jewish in its
perception."
John emphasizes
Jesus'
own claims to be the Messiah and the Son of God, which sets up a sharp
conflict
among Jews. By John's account, the Temple authorities plotted early on to
kill
Jesus and pressed a hesitant Pilate to give the Roman go-ahead for
crucifixion.
The scholars provide
words of explanation that scroll down the screen before the action begins,
noting that crucifixion was a Roman punishment not sanctioned by Jewish
law and
that Jesus and all his early followers were
Jewish.
The scholars' words
also
tell viewers that John was written "two generations after the
Crucifixion" and reflects a period of growing friction between early
Christians - who were living within Jewish communities - and Jewish
leaders.
That view follows
the
widespread scholarly opinion that John expresses the era when it was
written as
much as, or more than, what actually happened during Jesus'
lifetime.
Liberals will like
that
spin, but conservatives triumph in the film's final seconds when visual
twists
underscore the Gospel's assertion that it relied on an unnamed eyewitness
(not
necessarily John the apostle) to offer a true account of Jesus'
life.
In another
film-making
choice that will reduce Jewish objections, the scholars decided the script
should use the American Bible Society's 1966 "Good News
Bible."
They say the main
reason
was the accessible language, but it's also significant that, in the
original
Greek, John used "Ioudaioi" ("the Jews") 67 times,
suggesting collective Jewish involvement in opposing Jesus. The "Good
News
Bible" routinely translates the word as "the Jewish
authorities,"
thereby avoiding the idea that all Jews conspired against Jesus. Some
academics
have said it's wrong to change John's wording for the sake of political
correctness.
Segal and others
involved
in the John film think that seeing the whole story of Jesus will feel less
harsh than Gibson's passion play. And, they say, "John" is not a
debatable Hollywood reinterpretation but an exact biblical
record.
"John"
comes
from Visual Bible International, a Toronto-based, loosely Christian
company
that previously issued low budget, word-for-word versions of the Gospel of
Matthew and Acts for church and home video
markets.
Two years ago,
Visual
Bible enlisted Drabinsky, who helped raise money for the film and
assembled a
seasoned showbiz team, including director Philip Saville and screenwriter
John
Goldsmith.
The cast consists of
75
British and Canadian stage actors, but two men carry the three-hour film,
the
little-known Henry Ian Cusick playing Jesus as more relaxed and less grave
than
many who have taken on the role, and veteran Christopher Plummer as
narrator.
The film crew isn't
done
with the subject. Two days after the Toronto premiere, Drabinsky's team
will
assemble to mull a draft script for their next word-for-word biblical
flick,
"The Gospel of Mark."
Full text at:
http://www.goodnewsbroadcast.com/samaritans.html
|