The passion of Christ -a further theological issue

There's plenty in this and other articles about the film's alleged anti-semitism [I've not yet seen it so won't comment just now]. What I found intriguing is the following quote from the article referenced in the link:
"There is no resurrection in this film. A stone is rolled back, a zombie-Jesus is seen in profile for a second or two, and that's it. But there is a reason for this. In Gibson's theology, the resurrection has been rendered unnecessary by the infinite capacity of Jesus to withstand pain. Not the Risen Jesus, but the Survivor Jesus. Gibson's violence fantasies, as ingenious as perverse, are, at bottom, a fantasy of infinite male toughness." -James Carroll

This is indeed telling. I have my doubts aout a film that appears to be essentially a stations of the cross in the sense that the medieval fascination with suffering is not representative of the gospel accounts which are relatively unsentimental about the suffering [for more on this see the essay "The Meaning of His Suffering" on this site]. For some people it may be helpful but I'm also aware of some who already have difficulties with our "Messianic death cult" who will feel that this underlines their point about the sado-masichistic, anti-body tendencies in Christian faith.

But this comment by James Carroll seems to give a lot of pause for thought: has Gibson indeed retold the story with a theology that is Hollywood Machismo, in fact a kind of sacred violence which betrays the true intent of the gospel [see Walter Wink's comments on the theme of redemptive violence and its essentially pagan origins]. If this is so then there is a lot more to think about once the controversy about anti-semitism has died down.