Full Version: The Passion of the Christ
QUOTE(moif @ Feb 27 2004, 03:29 PM)
Has Gibsen, or any one else said why this film was made? Why does it only focus on the Passion?
Let's ask Mel or at least let Diane Sawyer ask him. From the interview.....
QUOTE
Feb. 17 — At "the height of spiritual bankruptcy" more than a decade ago, abusing alcohol and drugs, the actor Mel Gibson said he once contemplated hurling himself out a window.
But instead, he turned to the Bible, which ultimately inspired him to direct his new movie, The Passion of the Christ.
But instead, he turned to the Bible, which ultimately inspired him to direct his new movie, The Passion of the Christ.
And later on....
QUOTE
"I wanted it to be shocking," Gibson said. "And I also wanted it to be extreme. I wanted it to push the viewer over the edge … so that they see the enormity — the enormity of that sacrifice — to see that someone could endure that and still come back with love and forgiveness, even through extreme pain and suffering and ridicule."
and more....
QUOTE
Gibson, too, wants dialogue.
"Let's get this out on the table and talk about it," he said. "This is what the Talmud says. This is what the Gospel says. Let's talk. Let's talk. People are asking questions about things that have been buried a long time."
"I hope it inspires introspection, and I think it does," Gibson said. "I want to inspire and make people feel."
"Let's get this out on the table and talk about it," he said. "This is what the Talmud says. This is what the Gospel says. Let's talk. Let's talk. People are asking questions about things that have been buried a long time."
"I hope it inspires introspection, and I think it does," Gibson said. "I want to inspire and make people feel."
Nothing I can add to that.....
I have every intention of seeing it, the question is when...will I get there before DVD is released? My husband is Agnostic so there is little chance he will join me, I guess that makes him the Babysitter but then the question is who will I go with, I need a shoulder to bury my head behind when I can't take the blood...... Dilemmas Dilemmas
Aquilla
Thats an interesting article. I've never much cared for Mel Gibsen, but I never knew he was so religous.
It seems to me that this film is just another crutch to replace those he had to give up due to their destructive nature.
For my part, I will watch this film, but with mixed feelings. Its a historic moment and interesting in what it says about human hypocrisy, but at the same time the film is also an interesting barometer into what exactly is going on in America right now.
I've found some of the criticisms of this film to be so out of focus with my own European perceptions that I'm having a hard time seperating serious critique from out right hysteria.
Gibsen is asking for a dialogue, but I see precious few people taking him up on that. The focus seems to have shifted to the wild notion of anti semtism, which in itself is a fantastic example of the confusion which appears to exist in America's self perception today.
Thats an interesting article. I've never much cared for Mel Gibsen, but I never knew he was so religous.
It seems to me that this film is just another crutch to replace those he had to give up due to their destructive nature.
For my part, I will watch this film, but with mixed feelings. Its a historic moment and interesting in what it says about human hypocrisy, but at the same time the film is also an interesting barometer into what exactly is going on in America right now.
I've found some of the criticisms of this film to be so out of focus with my own European perceptions that I'm having a hard time seperating serious critique from out right hysteria.
Gibsen is asking for a dialogue, but I see precious few people taking him up on that. The focus seems to have shifted to the wild notion of anti semtism, which in itself is a fantastic example of the confusion which appears to exist in America's self perception today.
Sleeper, it's pretty much common sense than an atheist website won't look kindly to The Passion. And the fact still remains that Jews, not secular individuals are responsible for the bulk of the criticism of this movie. You can post two links, you can post two thousand, but when I turn on the TV, it is the Jews who are against this movie. It is the Jews who are protesting this movie. It is the Jews who asked Gibson to include a disclaimer at the end.
Doing a search and finding two examples does in no way indicate that the secular community is mainly responsible for the criticisms of this movie. Finding two thousand won't, either. On the internet, everyone can post their opinions. But when I turn on the TV, when I read a magazine, when I open the newspaper, it is the Jewish community, not the secular, who is criticizing this movie. I'm very curious as to why you think the secular community is responsible, as opposed to the Jewish, when there is an abundance of evidence that proves otherwise. If you're going to keep maintaining that the secular community is mostly responsible, you are wrong. Pure and simple. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact. The largest outcry against this movie has come from the Jewish community, and you can't dispute that fact.
Now do you mind telling me why you want to maintain blaming the secular community for the outcry against the movie, when anyone with access to a form of media realizes that it is the Jews who are mostly upset?
Doing a search and finding two examples does in no way indicate that the secular community is mainly responsible for the criticisms of this movie. Finding two thousand won't, either. On the internet, everyone can post their opinions. But when I turn on the TV, when I read a magazine, when I open the newspaper, it is the Jewish community, not the secular, who is criticizing this movie. I'm very curious as to why you think the secular community is responsible, as opposed to the Jewish, when there is an abundance of evidence that proves otherwise. If you're going to keep maintaining that the secular community is mostly responsible, you are wrong. Pure and simple. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact. The largest outcry against this movie has come from the Jewish community, and you can't dispute that fact.
Now do you mind telling me why you want to maintain blaming the secular community for the outcry against the movie, when anyone with access to a form of media realizes that it is the Jews who are mostly upset?
Just a reminder - this is the Casual Conversation forum. Please keep this light and try and stick to the general question: do you plan on seeing this film? Why/why not?
QUOTE(Jaime @ Feb 27 2004, 11:05 PM)
Just a reminder - this is the Casual Conversation forum. Please keep this light and try and stick to the general question: do you plan on seeing this film? Why/why not?
No, because I am quite familiar with the account recorded in the Gospels, and I don't see what this can add to it. (I am an atheist who has read the entire King James Bible.) I saw The Last Temptation of Christ, and it just seemed like the same old thing again, with one or two interesting touches. I don't think very many people will claim that Mel Gibson is a greater director than Martin Scorsese, so I don't expect this film to be of great interest to me.
It may be inspirational to Christians; that's great. I doubt it will have much effect on non-Christians, who will see it as just another version of a very familiar story. What about "semi-Christians" who are sitting on the fence? Some may be drawn more toward Christianity, some may be repelled by the violence. Roger Ebert (who gave this film four stars) calls this "the most violent film I have ever seen." That's saying a lot in this day and age.
The film is violent, no doubt about it. I don't think it's anymore violent than most rated R films these days, however. I think the violence seems much more personal than in most films. It's not random killings like in a war picture or a quick drive by like in a mob film. It's drawn out and everyone involved seems to take pride in what is happening, enjoying every blow delivered. The violence is there, but the manner in which it is delivered is what makes it so graphic, IMHO.
QUOTE(moif @ Feb 27 2004, 05:50 PM)
Aquilla
Thats an interesting article. I've never much cared for Mel Gibsen, but I never knew he was so religous.
It seems to me that this film is just another crutch to replace those he had to give up due to their destructive nature.
For my part, I will watch this film, but with mixed feelings. Its a historic moment and interesting in what it says about human hypocrisy, but at the same time the film is also an interesting barometer into what exactly is going on in America right now.
I've found some of the criticisms of this film to be so out of focus with my own European perceptions that I'm having a hard time seperating serious critique from out right hysteria.
Gibsen is asking for a dialogue, but I see precious few people taking him up on that. The focus seems to have shifted to the wild notion of anti semtism, which in itself is a fantastic example of the confusion which appears to exist in America's self perception today.
Thats an interesting article. I've never much cared for Mel Gibsen, but I never knew he was so religous.
It seems to me that this film is just another crutch to replace those he had to give up due to their destructive nature.
For my part, I will watch this film, but with mixed feelings. Its a historic moment and interesting in what it says about human hypocrisy, but at the same time the film is also an interesting barometer into what exactly is going on in America right now.
I've found some of the criticisms of this film to be so out of focus with my own European perceptions that I'm having a hard time seperating serious critique from out right hysteria.
Gibsen is asking for a dialogue, but I see precious few people taking him up on that. The focus seems to have shifted to the wild notion of anti semtism, which in itself is a fantastic example of the confusion which appears to exist in America's self perception today.
I didn't know that about Mel Gibson either, Moif, and I met him a few years ago on a satellite thing we were doing with him. To be honest, I didn't like him very much as a person, but maybe he was having a bad day, or maybe I was.
I had a long talk about this whole thing tonight with my fiance who was raised as a devout Catholic similar to the way Mel Gibson was and she explained a few things to me about the sorts of things they were taught. Based on her comments, I can understand his passion in this film, and that leads me back into the context of this discussion.....
Working in Southern California in the entertainment business as I have for the past several years has afforded me the opportunity to meet, and in some cases get to know a number of some of the world's greatest film makers. Without exception they all have a passion for what they do and what they do is to tell a story. The better the story is to them, the closer to home, the better they want to tell it, to share it with others. They see their job as imparting not just the literal story to their audience, but the underlying emotions and sensations associated with that story, to share their passion if you will. One very famous movie maker once told me that he wanted the audience to LIVE his movie, not just watch it, to forget they were in a theater (theatre to you
) and were instead in the movie itself. That is the art of movies.
There is an element of society in America today that is totally opposed to the idea of God and morality. They challenge and deride it at every turn. Their 'anything goes' lifestyles are threatened by it. This is what's at the core of the railings against The Passion.
The film is powerful and very moving. It's message is not threatening to anyone or thing, other than evil. And even there the film mostly made you aware of evil's existence.
The anti-Semitic claims are pure fantasy. They are an excuse. An excuse to silence the Christian beliefs of the vast majority of Americans. The political leanings of those putting forth most of the criticism are best left for another thread.
The film is powerful and very moving. It's message is not threatening to anyone or thing, other than evil. And even there the film mostly made you aware of evil's existence.
The anti-Semitic claims are pure fantasy. They are an excuse. An excuse to silence the Christian beliefs of the vast majority of Americans. The political leanings of those putting forth most of the criticism are best left for another thread.
I havent yet seen this fim, but me being a Christian, I do believe that i will see it with my mom and her boyfriend sometime in the near future.
Passion, Sleeper has already tried the tactic of blaming the secular community for what is obviously a Jewish backlash against the movie, and I didn't even really have to prove him wrong. He just is, and you are too.
Because we all know that if you don't believe in a god, you don't have any morals.
Anytime a religious person uses that tactic, I just get sorta ticked off. Excuse me if not believing in a fairy tale automatically means I don't have morals. YOU ARE WRONG. It means that instead of using someone else's outdated rules of what to wear, how to act, when to act, and so on, I develop my own. Anyhow, what's your point? Yes, there are people who don't believe in a god. What heathens they are. And no, god is not synonymous with morality. Neither is religion.
False. Atheists do not, in any way, fear, in any way, shape, or form, something that does not exist. Secular people simply don't belong to a particular religion. Of course, from your viewpoint, that makes them morally corrupted wackos. As a secular person, I do not care about this movie. The only concern I have about it is how it will unneccesarily incite more religious hatred and violence than already exists in America today, but that possibility alone is not enough to make me want to protest it or speak out against it.
By the way, secular means "without religion," not "without god." So who are you falsely trying to blame here? Secular people, or atheists?
The only thing that's pure fantasy, Passion, are your delusions of Christian persecution. And also your claim that the "vast" majority of Americans are Christian. The majority? Yes. Vast majority? I don't think so.
QUOTE
There is an element of society in America today that is totally opposed to the idea of God and morality.
Because we all know that if you don't believe in a god, you don't have any morals.
Anytime a religious person uses that tactic, I just get sorta ticked off. Excuse me if not believing in a fairy tale automatically means I don't have morals. YOU ARE WRONG. It means that instead of using someone else's outdated rules of what to wear, how to act, when to act, and so on, I develop my own. Anyhow, what's your point? Yes, there are people who don't believe in a god. What heathens they are. And no, god is not synonymous with morality. Neither is religion. QUOTE
They challenge and deride it at every turn.
What is your point?QUOTE
Their 'anything goes' lifestyles are threatened by it.
False. Atheists do not, in any way, fear, in any way, shape, or form, something that does not exist. Secular people simply don't belong to a particular religion. Of course, from your viewpoint, that makes them morally corrupted wackos.
As a secular person, I do not care about this movie. The only concern I have about it is how it will unneccesarily incite more religious hatred and violence than already exists in America today, but that possibility alone is not enough to make me want to protest it or speak out against it. By the way, secular means "without religion," not "without god." So who are you falsely trying to blame here? Secular people, or atheists?
QUOTE
The anti-Semitic claims are pure fantasy. They are an excuse. An excuse to silence the Christian beliefs of the vast majority of Americans. The political leanings of those putting forth most of the criticism are best left for another thread.
The only thing that's pure fantasy, Passion, are your delusions of Christian persecution. And also your claim that the "vast" majority of Americans are Christian. The majority? Yes. Vast majority? I don't think so.
Whether the film is good or bad doesnt really matter. It will make $$$ as 82% identify as christians and many feel obligated to see it.
Might be enough to make christian films mainstream for awhile.
Might be enough to make christian films mainstream for awhile.
QUOTE(SuzySteamboat @ Feb 28 2004, 08:19 AM)
Passion, Sleeper has already tried the tactic of blaming the secular community for what is obviously a Jewish backlash against the movie, and I didn't even really have to prove him wrong. He just is, and you are too.
Because we all know that if you don't believe in a god, you don't have any morals. Anytime a religious person uses that tactic, I just get sorta ticked off. Excuse me if not believing in a fairy tale automatically means I don't have morals. YOU ARE WRONG. It means that instead of using someone else's outdated rules of what to wear, how to act, when to act, and so on, I develop my own. Anyhow, what's your point? Yes, there are people who don't believe in a god. What heathens they are. And no, god is not synonymous with morality. Neither is religion.
False. Atheists do not, in any way, fear, in any way, shape, or form, something that does not exist. Secular people simply don't belong to a particular religion. Of course, from your viewpoint, that makes them morally corrupted wackos. As a secular person, I do not care about this movie. The only concern I have about it is how it will unneccesarily incite more religious hatred and violence than already exists in America today, but that possibility alone is not enough to make me want to protest it or speak out against it.
By the way, secular means "without religion," not "without god." So who are you falsely trying to blame here? Secular people, or atheists?
The only thing that's pure fantasy, Passion, are your delusions of Christian persecution. And also your claim that the "vast" majority of Americans are Christian. The majority? Yes. Vast majority? I don't think so.
QUOTE
There is an element of society in America today that is totally opposed to the idea of God and morality.
Because we all know that if you don't believe in a god, you don't have any morals.
Anytime a religious person uses that tactic, I just get sorta ticked off. Excuse me if not believing in a fairy tale automatically means I don't have morals. YOU ARE WRONG. It means that instead of using someone else's outdated rules of what to wear, how to act, when to act, and so on, I develop my own. Anyhow, what's your point? Yes, there are people who don't believe in a god. What heathens they are. And no, god is not synonymous with morality. Neither is religion. QUOTE
They challenge and deride it at every turn.
What is your point?QUOTE
Their 'anything goes' lifestyles are threatened by it.
False. Atheists do not, in any way, fear, in any way, shape, or form, something that does not exist. Secular people simply don't belong to a particular religion. Of course, from your viewpoint, that makes them morally corrupted wackos.
As a secular person, I do not care about this movie. The only concern I have about it is how it will unneccesarily incite more religious hatred and violence than already exists in America today, but that possibility alone is not enough to make me want to protest it or speak out against it. By the way, secular means "without religion," not "without god." So who are you falsely trying to blame here? Secular people, or atheists?
QUOTE
The anti-Semitic claims are pure fantasy. They are an excuse. An excuse to silence the Christian beliefs of the vast majority of Americans. The political leanings of those putting forth most of the criticism are best left for another thread.
The only thing that's pure fantasy, Passion, are your delusions of Christian persecution. And also your claim that the "vast" majority of Americans are Christian. The majority? Yes. Vast majority? I don't think so.
At last count some greater than 70% of Americans described themselves as Christian. I'd say that is a vast majority.
No need to get so upset just because someone doesn't agree with your position.
The fact is that Mel Gibson and this movie have been under attack for quite some time. Loud, persistent and at times vicious attack. Studio execs have said they will blackball him. There is no anti-Semitic message in the film and there is no claim that any one religion is better than another.
Just what is it about the work that angers you so? Assuming you've seen it (you wouldn't express such strong opinions if you hadn't, right?) what is it that you object so vehemently to? Noone is forcing the movie on you. Why are you so opposed to its existence?
Noone here has claimed persecution of Christians, why do you go on so? I haven't seen anyone deride your personal beliefs or values so why make this into something personal when it isn't.
If you're comfortable with a world where noone ever has to answer to a higher authority, go for it. But part of that world is allowing those who believe otherwise to do so without coming under fire. Mel Gibson has tried to do that.
Passion51 - We have already asked that everyone stop debating this. Do not continue it or you will be responsible for having this thread closed. This is the last warning we will post about it. There is a very simple question for us to discuss. Stick to it.
QUOTE(santasdad @ Feb 28 2004, 08:18 AM)
Whether the film is good or bad doesnt really matter. It will make $$$ as 82% identify as christians and many feel obligated to see it.
Might be enough to make christian films mainstream for awhile.
Might be enough to make christian films mainstream for awhile.
Well, according to the most recent box office figures, this movie is certainly a financial success. According to their estimates, in the first 3 days of public viewing it has grossed a little over $64.5 MILLION. My understanding is that Mel Gibson gets about half of that gross and then pays a percentage of that half to the distrbution company. I'd say from a purely commercial standpoint, this film is a major league success.
I have not yet seen the movie, but plan to as soon as my AMC discount kicks in (after it has been open for ten days) 
. My main reason for wanting to see this picture is to assess the "controversy" first hand. I've tried to keep an open mind about this project for some time, but have recently heard a few things which make me more dubious than I was before.
I tend to take religion very seriously - and wish more people were capable of approaching the subject like adults. I have recently spoken to a few people who do take religion seriously and have a fairly grown-up, scholarly approach - including a former religion major from Columbia University and a Catholic priest. From what they have told me, The Passion of the Christ is not so much anti-semitic as anti-Christian. By their accounts, the film departs radically from the Gospels to the point, according to one of them, of being heretical. (He was enraged by the film - as a Christian.)
Not yet having seen the film, I can't say myself, but one of my friends has told me that Gibson's treatment features a running character who seems to be some sort of androgynous force of evil - a Satanic character of some description which figures throughout the film. He felt that the presence of this character implied that the Passion was a class of battle between the forces of good and evil, rather than a mystery of sacrifice and a miracle of redemption. By suggesting that "powers of darkness" were behind the crucifixion, indicating a struggle between God and the devil, Gibson would be changing the entire thrust of the Gospels - and the whole message of Christianity.
I intend to see the film for myself to see if it is, indeed, heresy - and whether Gibson, as a traditionalist Catholic, should be excommunicated.
. My main reason for wanting to see this picture is to assess the "controversy" first hand. I've tried to keep an open mind about this project for some time, but have recently heard a few things which make me more dubious than I was before.I tend to take religion very seriously - and wish more people were capable of approaching the subject like adults. I have recently spoken to a few people who do take religion seriously and have a fairly grown-up, scholarly approach - including a former religion major from Columbia University and a Catholic priest. From what they have told me, The Passion of the Christ is not so much anti-semitic as anti-Christian. By their accounts, the film departs radically from the Gospels to the point, according to one of them, of being heretical. (He was enraged by the film - as a Christian.)
Not yet having seen the film, I can't say myself, but one of my friends has told me that Gibson's treatment features a running character who seems to be some sort of androgynous force of evil - a Satanic character of some description which figures throughout the film. He felt that the presence of this character implied that the Passion was a class of battle between the forces of good and evil, rather than a mystery of sacrifice and a miracle of redemption. By suggesting that "powers of darkness" were behind the crucifixion, indicating a struggle between God and the devil, Gibson would be changing the entire thrust of the Gospels - and the whole message of Christianity.
I intend to see the film for myself to see if it is, indeed, heresy - and whether Gibson, as a traditionalist Catholic, should be excommunicated.
Wow this thread provided me with some entertainment today! For the record I am an atheist, but I have a strong understanding of the Christian faith (my father is finishing up classes to become a minister). I plan on seeing the film, however I haven't decided if I'm gonna wait for the DVD or spend the $18 (my fiancee and I) to see it in the theater.
The entertainment factor of this thread comes mainly from the people arguing against it, or at least supporting those that are against it. As in some other debates we have had here its been said that all this anger/criticism in the media about this film only makes it more popular makes more people wanna see it.
IMO the anger about the film is split between coming from the secular and the Jewish community, however since the release of the film the criticism from the Jewish side has subsided as the argument that the film is ant-semitic has been all but debunked. I have seen countless Rabbi's and Jewish people on TV now saying that the film is NOT anti-semitic. Sure there are those that will continue to assert that claim, however nothing will change ever their minds. The Jews WERE responsible for Jesus' death theres no arguing that, and if that was left out then you have no film.
IMO the secular community IS all over this film and for what?? The only explanation is fear. So let the Venom bashing begin! I can't prove it because I am not psychic, but I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation for the vitriol that is rampant in the news. As I stated in the beginning I have not seen the film, but for some of the people who are complaining about the violence in the film to do so is ridiculous. Some of them are the same people who praised movies like "Kill Bill", etc. If they were consistent then I would have no problem with their analysis, but that is not the case here.
As an atheist I have NO problem with this film, or any other film that is made based on religion. We have freedom of religion and freedom of expression in this country and thats one reason our country is the greatest country on the planet. The secular community IMO wants to eliminate any sign of religion outside of a church, temple, synagogue, mosque, etc and thats WRONG! This is not (IMO) what the founders of this country wanted.
If this film brings more people into Christianity good for them. They have the right to choose their own path and if they are happy thats all that matters. I personally can't bring myself to believe, to the dismay of my family, however who am I to tell others they are inferior or "stupid" to believe the "story" or "fairy tale". In a few peoples posts here, in essence that is what they were saying. I will not name names but I'm sure others saw that as a personal attack and IMO you hurt any credibility you might have had in your argument.
The entertainment factor of this thread comes mainly from the people arguing against it, or at least supporting those that are against it. As in some other debates we have had here its been said that all this anger/criticism in the media about this film only makes it more popular makes more people wanna see it.
IMO the anger about the film is split between coming from the secular and the Jewish community, however since the release of the film the criticism from the Jewish side has subsided as the argument that the film is ant-semitic has been all but debunked. I have seen countless Rabbi's and Jewish people on TV now saying that the film is NOT anti-semitic. Sure there are those that will continue to assert that claim, however nothing will change ever their minds. The Jews WERE responsible for Jesus' death theres no arguing that, and if that was left out then you have no film.
IMO the secular community IS all over this film and for what?? The only explanation is fear. So let the Venom bashing begin! I can't prove it because I am not psychic, but I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation for the vitriol that is rampant in the news. As I stated in the beginning I have not seen the film, but for some of the people who are complaining about the violence in the film to do so is ridiculous. Some of them are the same people who praised movies like "Kill Bill", etc. If they were consistent then I would have no problem with their analysis, but that is not the case here.
As an atheist I have NO problem with this film, or any other film that is made based on religion. We have freedom of religion and freedom of expression in this country and thats one reason our country is the greatest country on the planet. The secular community IMO wants to eliminate any sign of religion outside of a church, temple, synagogue, mosque, etc and thats WRONG! This is not (IMO) what the founders of this country wanted.
If this film brings more people into Christianity good for them. They have the right to choose their own path and if they are happy thats all that matters. I personally can't bring myself to believe, to the dismay of my family, however who am I to tell others they are inferior or "stupid" to believe the "story" or "fairy tale". In a few peoples posts here, in essence that is what they were saying. I will not name names but I'm sure others saw that as a personal attack and IMO you hurt any credibility you might have had in your argument.
In my strong conviction to get my positive view of this movie out as widely as I can, I was compelled to return, briefly, to AD (where I have not posted in a great while 
) and see what was being said about this wonderful film.
Firstly, I am a Christian, strongly rooted in the idea that Christ, as God made man, sacrificed himself for the sins of all mankind. Though, as strongly convicted to this idea as I was before seeing this film, I anticipated (rightly) that this graphic visualization of the eventuality of Christ's purpose on Earth would serve only to strengthen that feeling within me. The film is the most powerful piece of art (including all forms of media in my definition of art) I have ever experienced. I cried openly, cringing at times with the great weight of realization that this all took place in the stead of our entire sinful race (myself included, most certainly). I prayed harder than I ever prayed during the earliest of these moments of emotion, begging forgiveness for my innumerous sins because I felt so guilty for them at that moment, seeing the manifestation of their just punishment being inflicted upon another, innocent man. Such an amazing statement was made by actually seeing this amazing act of forgiveness, and I feel more religious and thankful for God's grace than ever after the experience of seeing this movie. I cried for minutes after the movie ended, and couldn't rid it of my mind for hours more. It was just that amazingly spiritual for me, but I can't imagine the same experience for many, let alone everyone.
I don't know what information is available to compare to, but I think that those who are continually trying to point out inaccuracies and overexaggerations are missing, perhaps, the purpose of the whole movie. If you want it down straight, read the Bible, and I think that the movie expects that those who watch it either have or will after seeing it. The film, to my mind, was stretched and formed to be a spiritually moving experience to those of faith, to strengthen their faith in and understanding of what Christ's ultimate purpose on Earth was. I know that was accomplished in me, and based on what I have heard from Mel Gibson's various interviews, that is what he has in mind. For those who claim that the violence is overemphasized, I must say I agree. This is purely for the reason that Gibson himself said that he overemphasized it to make more of an impression. For me, this also worked, as I felt as though, with each blow, Christ's purpose and sacrifice was made more clear and amazing. This movie was not meant to present a Jesus that gave compelling teachings, walked on water, and healed the sick, and I think that is the point that the majority of nay-saying critics could do with hearing the most, as they fault the movie for focusing too much on Christ's death. This, however, was the purpose of this movie as well as Christ's time on Earth. Without understanding this, the movie would seem very pointless indeed.
The film is so well done and works so well in doing what it really means to do: invoke emotion and understanding. The violence is extreme: Roger Ebert was so bold as to say that this film would have warranted an NC-17 rating were it anyone but Jesus on the cross, so I would not recommend anyone younger than 13 seeing the movie, and this only if they have a true understanding of what they are going to be seeing. The film is relentless, which is both good and bad depending on your affiliation with the film. As for Mel Gibson's intentions in making this movie, I am sure they were good. Making this movie was by NO means a financial home run guaranteed. The film has, though, gained much support from existing Christian ministries, which was, in my opinion, crucial to its success. I can see how one might interpret parts of the film to be dangerous in that they might spark anti-Semitic feeling, but I believe that the film will leave people so amazed and shaken by its true message that these small facts will be highly overlooked. It is clear to those who understand Christianity that Christ's death was inevitable, and that sinful humanity itself was his executioner, not one race therein. As I'm sure you can grasp after this longwinded account, I was very touched and appreciative of this movie, and I feel that all who consider themselves Christians should examine themselves and see this movie. I doubt highly that anyone will be converted simply by watching this movie, but hopefully the rest of the Christian community will be as empowered by this film as I was and find it possible now to spread the word more widely.
Sorry so long
) and see what was being said about this wonderful film.Firstly, I am a Christian, strongly rooted in the idea that Christ, as God made man, sacrificed himself for the sins of all mankind. Though, as strongly convicted to this idea as I was before seeing this film, I anticipated (rightly) that this graphic visualization of the eventuality of Christ's purpose on Earth would serve only to strengthen that feeling within me. The film is the most powerful piece of art (including all forms of media in my definition of art) I have ever experienced. I cried openly, cringing at times with the great weight of realization that this all took place in the stead of our entire sinful race (myself included, most certainly). I prayed harder than I ever prayed during the earliest of these moments of emotion, begging forgiveness for my innumerous sins because I felt so guilty for them at that moment, seeing the manifestation of their just punishment being inflicted upon another, innocent man. Such an amazing statement was made by actually seeing this amazing act of forgiveness, and I feel more religious and thankful for God's grace than ever after the experience of seeing this movie. I cried for minutes after the movie ended, and couldn't rid it of my mind for hours more. It was just that amazingly spiritual for me, but I can't imagine the same experience for many, let alone everyone.
I don't know what information is available to compare to, but I think that those who are continually trying to point out inaccuracies and overexaggerations are missing, perhaps, the purpose of the whole movie. If you want it down straight, read the Bible, and I think that the movie expects that those who watch it either have or will after seeing it. The film, to my mind, was stretched and formed to be a spiritually moving experience to those of faith, to strengthen their faith in and understanding of what Christ's ultimate purpose on Earth was. I know that was accomplished in me, and based on what I have heard from Mel Gibson's various interviews, that is what he has in mind. For those who claim that the violence is overemphasized, I must say I agree. This is purely for the reason that Gibson himself said that he overemphasized it to make more of an impression. For me, this also worked, as I felt as though, with each blow, Christ's purpose and sacrifice was made more clear and amazing. This movie was not meant to present a Jesus that gave compelling teachings, walked on water, and healed the sick, and I think that is the point that the majority of nay-saying critics could do with hearing the most, as they fault the movie for focusing too much on Christ's death. This, however, was the purpose of this movie as well as Christ's time on Earth. Without understanding this, the movie would seem very pointless indeed.
The film is so well done and works so well in doing what it really means to do: invoke emotion and understanding. The violence is extreme: Roger Ebert was so bold as to say that this film would have warranted an NC-17 rating were it anyone but Jesus on the cross, so I would not recommend anyone younger than 13 seeing the movie, and this only if they have a true understanding of what they are going to be seeing. The film is relentless, which is both good and bad depending on your affiliation with the film. As for Mel Gibson's intentions in making this movie, I am sure they were good. Making this movie was by NO means a financial home run guaranteed. The film has, though, gained much support from existing Christian ministries, which was, in my opinion, crucial to its success. I can see how one might interpret parts of the film to be dangerous in that they might spark anti-Semitic feeling, but I believe that the film will leave people so amazed and shaken by its true message that these small facts will be highly overlooked. It is clear to those who understand Christianity that Christ's death was inevitable, and that sinful humanity itself was his executioner, not one race therein. As I'm sure you can grasp after this longwinded account, I was very touched and appreciative of this movie, and I feel that all who consider themselves Christians should examine themselves and see this movie. I doubt highly that anyone will be converted simply by watching this movie, but hopefully the rest of the Christian community will be as empowered by this film as I was and find it possible now to spread the word more widely.
Sorry so long
Thanks for the review, CTE - but that is not the purpose of this thread. As indicated by Sleeper at the outset, this is not the place for anyone to get their views of this movie out as widely as they can, positive or negative, regardless of their "conviction". I am delighted that the film was an affirmation of your faith and an inspiration to you - and hope it will prove the same for others, especially if it leads to their becoming better Christians in practice. You could have saved a bit of effort, though - and a lot of space - by simply having posted "I voted Yes".
For future reference, we have a Casual Conversation thread for people to post opinions on recent films here.
For future reference, we have a Casual Conversation thread for people to post opinions on recent films here.
I for one certainly appreciated CTE's review and comments on the movie, particluarly given that they are only one of 4 thus far to have actually seen it. I found his reaction to it in the context of his self-described religious beliefs to be useful at perhaps understanding better the extraordinary reaction to this particualr film, both positive and negative.
I voted no and im not going to see it. The reason? Im not interested...I mean everyone knows how this movie is going to end....seriously why watch a movie when you can read the gospels accounts in a matter of minutes....wait let me guess the storyline....Jesus is betrayed captured and sentenced to death, Barabas goes free, Caiphus calls for his head, Pilate hesitantly orders the execution, they give jesus a thorned crown, he is nailed to a cross, he is impaled in the abdomen, he dies, he rises, James, Peter and Mary push the movement...the end. This movie cannot be like JFK...I mean is Peter on the sandy knoll slinging rocks at jesus with a slingshot? Is Judas a Roman spy? Is Judas the lover of Roman emperor Tiberius? Is Pontius Pilate a cross dresser?? I am just not interested in a movie in which I know everything thats going to happen...and no just because it's jesus it doesnt transend by preferences.
QUOTE(Venom @ Feb 29 2004, 04:15 PM)
I personally can't bring myself to believe, to the dismay of my family, however who am I to tell others they are inferior or "stupid" to believe the "story" or "fairy tale". In a few peoples posts here, in essence that is what they were saying.
The topic of this thread is:
"Are you going to see it, why or why not?"
I explained why I wasn't likely to see it.
If you have a problem with my reason (it is an uninteresting fairy tale to me), then don't read this topic. Some people may be offended by my interpretation of the bible, but I get offended when the bible implies that homosexuals are an abomination to society. While my main intention was not to offend Christians, I'm hardly not going to hold back when the VAST MAJORITY of them are bigots with no reasoning behind some of their hurtful ways. Let's not get into name calling, but lets also not start playing the "I take offense to that" game.
QUOTE(Venom @ Feb 29 2004, 04:15 PM)
I will not name names but I'm sure others saw that as a personal attack and IMO you hurt any credibility you might have had in your argument.
I wasn't making any argument - so credibility of argument is irrelevant. I was just answering the question: will you see this movie? why or why not. And I was speculating as to why some atheists (secularists) might not be interested in seeing it.
QUOTE(perspective @ Mar 1 2004, 07:38 AM)
If you have a problem with my reason (it is an uninteresting fairy tale to me), then don't read this topic.
perspective - you have NO AUTHORITY to dictate who reads threads here. Please refrain from instructing members on how to use the forum. And PLEASE stop calling people bigots just because they disagree with you. It is unconstructive and inflammatory.
FINAL WARNING ON THIS THREAD FOR EVERYONE. Discuss why or why you will not see this movie and do not go beyond those parameters.
FINAL WARNING ON THIS THREAD FOR EVERYONE. Discuss why or why you will not see this movie and do not go beyond those parameters.
QUOTE(Wertz @ Mar 1 2004, 03:36 AM)
Thanks for the review, CTE - but that is not the purpose of this thread. As indicated by Sleeper at the outset, this is not the place for anyone to get their views of this movie out as widely as they can, positive or negative, regardless of their "conviction". I am delighted that the film was an affirmation of your faith and an inspiration to you - and hope it will prove the same for others, especially if it leads to their becoming better Christians in practice. You could have saved a bit of effort, though - and a lot of space - by simply having posted "I voted Yes".
For future reference, we have a Casual Conversation thread for people to post opinions on recent films here.
For future reference, we have a Casual Conversation thread for people to post opinions on recent films here.
All apologies, O High and Mighty Wertz...spare me your sarcasm. I said my return would be brief, and now I am brought back to the very reason this is so: too much concern on where somebody says something instead of what they're saying.
Hopefully things will change, but I doubt it. Peace.
CLOSED. Too bad this got personal AGAIN.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.