Notes to "Passion or PTSD ?"

* One of the ironies surrounding this film arises out of a confluence of:
(a) Anti-Semites accusing Jews (ADL, Wiesenthal Centre, etc.) of interfering with the film because, in their eyes, it has remained pure and unadulterated by any Jewish "conspiracies" bent on censoring and subverting the "Good News", and
(b) the fact that the film actually contains obvious pro-Semitic contrivances and departures from the Gospel text likely designed by Gibson to mitigate the text's built-in anti-Semitism !

At any rate, Mel Gibson has created a film that is distinctly less anti-Semitic than the New Testament itself.

Some examples:

• At the ad hoc drumhead trial by members of the Temple and Sanhedrin leadership, two of the elder Kohanim (or perhaps Sanhedrin members mistakenly dressed up in the ritual priestly uniform) stand up to Caiaphas and forcefully challenge the lack of due process, one calling the proceeding a "travesty". Each is summarily manhandled out of the room. Direct challenges to the trial are not present in the Gospels (though there is mention that Joseph of Aramathea did not consent to Caiaphas' plans).
• As the scourged and exhausted Jesus drags his cross along to the place of crucifixion, he is still being whipped and beaten by the Roman guards -- to the point of collapse. The Romans randomly grab a bystander and order him to help carry it the rest of the way. Significantly, they call him "Jew" (Simon of Cyrene in the text) -- one of the very few times we see the word in the subtitles, in spite of where the film takes place. After a while Jesus collapses again and now the Romans start beating him with renewed frenzy. The "Jew" drops the cross, confronts the Romans, emotionally rebuking them, appealing to them to stop beating Jesus. The Romans back down and the two re-shoulder the burden of the cross together, the camera angle showing them arm-in-arm working in cooperation. Finally, they arrive and Simon is set free, but instead of high-tailing it out of there, he is so distraught over the cruelty he has just witnessed that he is clearly in shock and in tears has to be forced out of the scene by the Romans.
  But in the text, "Simon of Cyrene" is just some guy they grabbed and forced to help carry the cross and that's the end of that.

It is noteworthy that the film contains Jewish characters, in both the Jewish leadership and the general populace, who are not believers in Jesus' claims, and yet are sympathetic defenders of Jesus' "human rights". These are presented with distinct innovations by Gibson that certainly reduce the anti-Semitic effects compared to the text.
(Note that there have been later speculative & presumptive "drush" works hoping that two members of the Sanhedrin, Nicodemus and Joseph of Aramathea were followers of Jesus, ... and that Simon & his son Rufus eventually became followers. In any event, these characters are not shown to have any sympathy with Jesus' teachings in the film).

Most likely in order to sustain the controversy as long as possible, the popular media has left out any mention of these events from their reviews and articles. I've read about 30 articles so far (as of Mar.1) and observed TV discussions and as far as I've seen, nobody has made reference to these at all (not even Christian supporters of the film).

While the above examples stand out, there are also lesser examples, that may be more subject to interpretation. It seems to me that the film makes a clear distinction between a largely corrupt Jewish leadership of the period and a more mixed populace with no clear culpability in Jesus' death.

• The size of the crowd that is permitted into Pilate's inner courtyard, shouting for Jesus' death is small compared to some other Jesus films -- at most a few hundred.
• Only Caiaphas utters the damning line from Matthew 27:26 "let his blood be upon us and out children", rather than the whole crowd as in the text. (And at the last minute, due in no small measure to ADL's involvement, Gibson agreed to delete the line from the subtitles, so the average viewer doesn't even know it's there).
• The film conveys the sense that Jesus himself is taking full responsibility for starting the ball rolling that gets him tortured and killed. Deliberately and unnecessarily confessing his blasphemy at the trial, and behaving similarly in front of Pilate would be much like driving into Customs at the border and saying "I have something special in my trunk, and the whole world's going to hear about it real soon". You pretty much know what's going to happen next.

In a nutshell, Mel Gibson actually improves upon the Gospels, in terms of increasing the ratio of pro-Semitic and neutral elements to anti-Semitic elements. By failing to recognize this, the ADL and others who have jumped on their bandwagon may fracture whatever is stopping a seemingly sympathetic Gibson from turning into an unremitting anti-Semite like his father.