posted on February 25, 2004 12:27:14 AM new
We've all heard about this Mel Gibson film, I'm sure. It's stirred up a lot of controversy. From what some have said, it's Gibson's personal version of the New Testiment.
Anyone here going to see it? It opens today [Wednesday] and I've heard tickets have been sold out.
I'd like to see it....even though I absolutely HATE subtitles....and I don't understand nor speak Latin.
posted on February 25, 2004 03:26:24 AM new
well i'm not too thrill about the gore and violence.
I mean I understand Christ went through a lot..
but from what I read and what I've seen so far from clips.... the movie focuses too much on the gore/blood/pain parts... and seems to establish less of who and what Christ is..
anyways be warned, children SHOULD DEFINITELY NOT see this movie!(well course its R rated but yeah) even some adult who dislike gore/violence should avoid as well
I can see the movie will work well for those that knows the story and some background of who Jesus was... but I'm thinking for those that dont, they're just going to see a lot of blood and wonder why they're seeing such horrible images.
but i haven't really seen it yet, so I dont know why I'm giving a review. lol
just a summary of the many reviews i've read so far.
posted on February 25, 2004 07:16:23 AM new
I want to see it just to see what the controversy is all about, but don't have any specific time in mind. Maybe next week.
-------------------
Replay Media
Games of all kinds!
posted on February 25, 2004 08:24:10 AM new
Linda, I am looking forward to seeing it. Understand it to be a very intense and moving film. Really dont feel like dealing with the crowds though. Maybe can sneak in a matinee. Is the whole thing subtitled?
I didnt know that if so. (I always watch foreign films, so much more interesting that most american made ones!)
posted on February 25, 2004 10:53:59 AM new
Nero - apparently the whole thingis spoken in a dead latin dialec so yeah, it is all subtitled.
I may go see it, but not this week, I hate crowded theaters and for some reason, subtitles seem to make many people think it is ok to talk thru the movie. Don't they know that not talking is not about interupting the dialog, it's about interfering with the suspension of disbelief
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on February 25, 2004 12:01:26 PM new
I am taken back by all the blah blah about Jesus' suffering. He suffered no more than any other person tortured and killed by the Romans. I would think that the folks eaten alive by animals in the Coloseum suffered even more.
I guess the crux of the Christian mythology- Jesus rising from the dead- has become somewhat boring. The blood and guts is just more exciting.
I predict that after the churches get done filling the seats with free tickets, the movie too will die and be resurected on DVD in time for xmas.
posted on February 25, 2004 12:36:47 PM new
I heard it was anti-Semitic. That Gibson portrayed the Jews as being to blame for the death of Jesus instead of the Romans.
posted on February 25, 2004 12:53:01 PM new
How can the christians blame anyone, even the Romans for Jesus' death ?
According to christian mythology, Jesus was born to be crucified- it was pre-ordained by god and could not be changed. Anyway, today we call what happened to Jesus suicide by cop.
posted on February 25, 2004 02:12:06 PM new
The ruling priesthood wanted him out of the way. Can not blame Rome for this one.
SPOR Will wait for the DVD to come out.
posted on February 25, 2004 02:13:09 PM new
Linda, so are you going to see it?
Latin, well mine is real rusty, since Vatican II and I don't mind subtitles for this one. I'm not Catholic any longer, but still Christian.
Reamond
I would think that the folks eaten alive by animals in the Coloseum suffered even more.
Sure they might have, but those folks were they not the Christians of the day being sent into the Coloseum? I mean according to your so called Christian mythology?
Kraft
I heard it was anti-Semitic. That Gibson portrayed the Jews as being to blame for the death of Jesus instead of the Romans.
I'd like to know how this could even be considered as anti Semitic. I mean, sure, maybe well over 19 centuries ago, they argued (maybe) that the Jewish people did... but today.... even your most learned Bible theologian could tell you that Christ was crucified by all of Humanity
And if you want to make it easy...... in those days things were a lot different.. Jesus was a Jew. The people where he lived were Jews. Romans were ruling, but still had Jewish rulers also. So the population of the place killed him, but according to the so called Christian mythology We all killed Him. The four Gospels in the New Testament all confirm the Jesus Christ died for all our sins. Jews, Christians, pagans, what have you, all.
I have my dictionary. The book type, not the online one
Course its old, this had to be when I went to school, as the latest President in the beginning is JOHNSON Websters Dictionary.
in it
Passion: <L. pp. of pati, to suffer> 1. Originally, suffering, as of a martyr. 2. the sufferings of Jesus during the Crucifixion or after the Last Supper.
I wonder if they've changed the meaning in the dictionary since the early 60's?
What I read is this was Gibson's thing. He went to Church every day before filming and received communion. People are making a big deal out of that.. I say. so what? This was his movie, he paid for the making of it, no other Hollywood producer would take it on, so he did himself.
Gore, blood, gruesome. Yes, it most likely was! And thats the reason for some not seeing it.... thats their decision.
Funny though, our society now, seems to be DE-sensitized to death, blood and guts. There are tons of movies that have been made that are REALLY gruesome. I don't know how many saw Saving Private Ryan, it was like the first 20 minutes, and thats all you saw were heads flying off, legs and arms, and LOTS of blood and gore.... and thats just one movie. There are tons of them, with violence, and not to mention the horror flicks.
We're going to see it. I'm sure it will be packed or sold out for awhile, but in the coming month, we definitly will see it.
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
In Wichita, Kansas, one middle-aged woman died of an apparent heart attack while watching the film's climactic crucifixion scene, a local television station reported.
posted on February 25, 2004 05:19:50 PM new
I'll be seeing the movie, but I'm not looking forward to it. It's going to be difficult watching Christ being tortured for 2 hours.
Some interesting facts: The 33 year old actor's initials are JC and was struck by lightning twice during the filming (wasn't injured).
posted on February 25, 2004 05:21:54 PM new
QUOTE FROM http://exchristian.net/exchristian/2003_07_16_archive.php
AUSTIN Herbert Washington, whom co-workers at Significant Plastics Inc. say was unduly concerned with the rapture and the second coming of Christ, suffered a serious heart attack when co-workers pretended they'd been caught away without him.
Last Tuesday, they lay work outfits on their chairs and hid in a supply room, and when Herbert came back from the restroom, he thought the rapture had occurred. The janitor, an outspoken Muslim, pretended to have witnessed everyone disappear and ran around the office feigning panic. Herbert fell to the ground clutching his heart and screaming, "I knew you'd forget me, Jesus! What did I do wrong?" He was taken to a local hospital. The employees emerged, sobered, from the supply room and gathered up their extra clothes.
"We didn't mean to scare him to death," said one woman. "He's just always talking about it, so today we decided to turn the tables on him."
Washington underwent bypass surgery and is recovering well and "digging into the Bible like never before," says his wife.
posted on February 25, 2004 05:28:34 PM new
That story comes to us via LarkNews.com, a satirical online newspaper.
Edited tosay--not that about the actor being struck by lightning--that's true. The one about the rapture.
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
[ edited by bunnicula on Feb 25, 2004 05:30 PM ]
posted on February 25, 2004 05:34:25 PM newSure they might have, but those folks were they not the Christians of the day being sent into the Coloseum? I mean according to your so called Christian mythology?
Some people put to death by the Romans were christian, but the vast majority of people killed and tortured by the Romans were not christians. These facts have nothing to do with the christian mythology of miracles and resurrection.
The christians were only around and persecuted for the last 3 centuries more or less of the Roman empire. There were far more non-christians killed by the Romans in the previous 6 centuries.
Jesus suffered certainly no more than any of the other people that the Romans tortured and killed, and you can bet there were many that suffered far worse at the hands of the Romans.
And in defence of the Romans, they were not the only ones that tortured and killed people. It was quite common of the times to do this to "criminals" and defeated foes.
As I alluded to earlier, Gibson has taken the most theatrically sensationalistic and least important part of the Jesus story in hopes that someone will watch it. It would be quite boring to watch a movie about the vicitudes of heaven, hell, redemption, salvation, the sermon on the mount and what it means in context to those times and now.
Jesus' suffering was no worse than anyone elses under the heel of the Romans, so why make a movie about it other than to create a cheap sensation and make some moohla?
posted on February 25, 2004 05:46:09 PM newJesus' suffering was no worse than anyone elses under the heel of the Romans, so why make a movie about it other than to create a cheap sensation and make some moohla?
a) It doesn't matter whether "he suffered more." He's Jesus, the focal point of a religion.
b) because it's a good story, whether you are a believer or not.
c) Gibson thought others would be interested in the story--after all there have been a couple of hundred films already made about Jesus around the world.
d) no film would ever be made if the the makers thought they'd not make a buck from it. Well, some documentaries, but not theatrical films...
******
Censorship, like charity, should begin at home; but unlike charity, it should end there --Clare Booth Luce
posted on February 25, 2004 05:50:20 PM new
NTS - My Merriam-Webster Dictionary [1998] says the same as yours.
And I've heard IF this movie is successful, Gibson has plans for more. One thing that did surprise me was that I heard someone say it took 10 years to make this film(?)
posted on February 25, 2004 05:51:46 PM newJesus' suffering was no worse than anyone elses under the heel of the Romans, so why make a movie about it other than to create a cheap sensation and make some moohla?
No, I'm sure plenty others suffered just as much as He did under the Roman rule, maybe worse.
Why make a movie about it.
What I read, is it was Gibsons way of trying to show people and possibly convert them. Lots of people are out there trying to convert others. A way of showing others what he found in his own search, and his own religion-Catholicism.
The movie showed the Passion the suffering of what Christ went through to save all people, as in 'He died for our sins' but that is if you believe in this Christian mythology
btw Reamond, are other beliefs or religions myths also, or just the Christian beliefs?
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
posted on February 25, 2004 05:56:13 PM new
LOL Linda, I know I am old, and have used this HUGE Websters since H.S.!
I know they've added 'new words' since, but I wouldn't think they would change meanings..
Yes, it will be hard to watch, but I want to see this.
Another thing about the anti Semitism ... If the Jewish people think it is, then they have been thinking the four gospels in the NT anti Semitic all this time? Its been there for quite awhile.. so I'm curious.
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
posted on February 25, 2004 06:05:54 PM new
Oh, yeah about the 10 years in the making... yeah, I've been reading about this movie for about a year now.
I did not watch the interview Mel Gibson had with Diane Sawyer? (I think it was her) but read about what happened...he said that he had the 'fame and money' and it wasn't enough.. he was about to 'throw himself out a window' when he picked up his Bible, and thats where he went back into the Church. And then came the idea to 'share' what he expierenced, so he made the movie.
Thats interesting that he will or might make more.
I remember, and even watched those 'Left Behind' movie(s) I only saw the first one. I just do not believe in the 'rapture'. There are those that do, and those that don't. I'm one that doesn't.
Did anyone ever protest and make a fuss when those HUGE EPIC movies about the Bible came out? In the early 60's I think. Most were even shown at the Cinerama, the HUGE screen theater here. I remember seeing all those, and they were Huge movies in those days. Did they make this much of a big deal over The Temptation Of Christ? or Jesus Christ Superstar? I don't think so.
__________________________________
"Somewhere, something incredible is waiting to be known."- Carl Sagan
posted on February 25, 2004 06:26:16 PM new
As a teen, course that was in the dark ages , I attended a group called Youth-For-Christ. We'd get on the Church busses and go see these Christian movies. Busses from all over came too. The threaters were huge and so were the screens.
posted on February 25, 2004 06:28:04 PM new
:: Did they make this much of a big deal over The Temptation Of Christ? ::
Are you referring to The Last Temptation of Christ, the 1988 movie? If so, oh hell yeah, there was picketing at the theaters over that one, massive christian uproar, bomb threats at theaters, etc. Definately a big deal made over that one. I was not paying as much attention to the media debate over that one but I don't remember there being intelligent debate over Last Temptation as there has been on this one possibly because last temptation dealt in conjecture where as Passion deals with a literal translation of scriptures which have been since been reinterpreted. I have enjoyed watching a the debate and I really don't think that the Jewish population has as much to worry about as they are making of it as I think the people who are going to see this movie either already have anti semetic feelings or are intelligent and free thinking enough that they would not be swayed simply by a single interpretation.
BTW - I am now watching the Dennis Miller Show where two of the three guests on the show - both of whom are argueing against the movie - have not even seen the movie. Every person who has seen the movie that I have seen today that saw the movie did not see the Jew Hating slant that is expoused by those who have not seen it.
~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by Fenix03 on Feb 25, 2004 06:31 PM ]
[ edited by austbounty on Feb 25, 2004 05:32 PM ]