The Passion

Manach

Out of curiosity, how many people would be thinking of going to see Gibson’s film?
Or would the supposed anti-Semitic nature, and violence put people off viewing it.

BEAT

It's a movie for christ's sake...no pun intended. I cant wait to see it actually. Every film gibson has made has been wonderful and I can only imagine that this will be the best picture of teh year. He is wonderfully gifted at making films based on historic facts and he pours his heart and soul into it so without seeing it yet, I know I will love it. Maybe go to see it tomorrow.
I can understand why the jews have a problem, they do not want the christians who takes things literally to come after them. I can only hope that there will not be any such ignorant behavior. Afrerall, what kind of a christian goes around torturing other religions?

AL][EN

I cant wait to see the film im more curious than anything else as to what all this hype is about. and i've herd somewhere that mel himself is a devote catholic (which as far as im aware is true) so how bad can it really be?

i agree with BEAT really i do hope there isnt a backlash of anykind i really cant see it happening as she says its only a film

sanvean

I'm looking forward to it, although I was somewhat dissapointed that apparently it's not *quite* the straight forward telling that it was supposed to have been. I was under the impression that it would be direct from the gospels, but apparently he's included a couple of scenes from passion plays in the eighteenth and nineteenth century ...

I'm also amazed that a film which is reported to be so explicitly violent and bloody has gotten only a 15s cert (I may be wrong on this). apparently resevoir dogs et al have nothing on this one, and yet they of course got eighteens. i guess if it's about jesus christ, then the violence is more acceptable..?

watty

Reading about it, it seems more a voyuristic violence fest than a useful telling of the "Good News".

Look at how much description there is in entire NT or even just the Gospels of violence.

I think the film can't fail to take the "passion" out of context. Though I don't think that accusations that it is Anti-Semitic are true. It will only fuel anti-semitism in those already Bigots. I think the Church has more to worry about it distracting from the Chrisitain message of Passover (mis-named Easter) than Jews about Anti-Semitism.

Washout

Originally posted by BEAT

I can understand why the jews have a problem, they do not want the christians who takes things literally to come after them. I can only hope that there will not be any such ignorant behavior. Afrerall, what kind of a christian goes around torturing other religions?

hrmmmmm The Crusades
Christians who dont accept other religons? as all christians are meant to do? as Chist has been the only saviour according to christianity.
Other religons believe in differant prophets such as mohamad for islam and Ram krishna for hindus etc....

There has been some anti sematic behavoir in the states since the release of the movie the with some synogogues experiencing vandalism but nothing overwhelming.

I look forward to seeing it though...just to see what the fuss is all about

sanvean

Originally posted by BEAT
Afrerall, what kind of a christian goes around torturing other religions?

also, more specifically, there was generally a significant increase in anti-semitic violence after the showing of 'passion plays', which tended to demonise the jews. these are the plays that gibson has taken from in order to 'flesh out' his film.

JustHalf

Really interesting review of the film here:
http://www.livingtorah.org/journal/archives/2004/02/28/the_passion_of_the_christ.html

loismustdie

brilliant film but very unpleasent. no scene in hannibal/[insert yucky film] compares. not so much religious but will definitely play on/mess with your mind afterwards

Wolfie

I havent seen the movie yet, but from what I have heard, it is violent, but it shows the factual events of the crucifixion.. The crucifixion of Christ *was* violent. Torturing a man, stabbing him and nailing him to a big wooden cross is not exactly pleasant is it? And the Jews being annoyed at the movie? It shows how they acted towards Christ, and the truth hurts for them. The Jews had the decision to crucify Christ or a criminal, and chose Christ. The movie doesnt show the Jews in a good light, but that is the only light they can be shown in, as that is how they played their part in the history of Christs crucifixion.

I think the story is more aimed towards showing the sacrifice of Christ rather than spreading 'the good news'.

loismustdie

the violence servd well to get people's attention and make them sympathis with jesus, whether or not they had christian beliefs. mel gibson proved to have brilliant directing skills

MeatProduct

Comments removed by myself.

Nick

neuro-praxis

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH! Meatproduct. STOP YOUR NONSENSE.

IrishMike

Originally posted by sanvean
apparently he's included a couple of scenes from passion plays in the eighteenth and nineteenth century

please dont make stuff up
his film is based on the gospels and on the writings of a
mystic called Anne Catherine Emmerich
Its not a "play" as u put it


And the film is amazing
saw it the sunday it came out in the cinema
there was an add b4 hand from some christian group saying something along the lines of "bring jesus into your life, he is your friend", upon hearin it there were more than a few people laughing and gigglin
after the film when the lights came out no one said a word and i mean no one
was really strange walkin out of a cinema in total silence with people left right and center drying their eyes
brilliant brilliant film
as 4 anti semetic thats bull****
if gibson had made a film about hitler would germans rise up against it and complain it was racist ? i think not:rolleyes:

40crush41

haha, meat-product, really... just live and let live. but thanks for the warning anyway.

so anyway, i saw the movie. scratch my head at the anti-Semitic criticisms because really i thought that mel gibson truely showed how Jesus drove himself to the cross. He showed all of the outlets that were given to Him, how He was tormented by the devil, but he still "took up his cross" anyway. There were so many times that he could have denied this burden, but he still carried on. and for that reason, the pain that gibson showed he went through was even more meaningful, yes gory, but we should all understand the sacrifice that He made for us, amazing film.

~beth

JustHalf

Originally posted by MeatProduct
We mustn't forget that there is no historical evidence that supports the events in the Bible. Essentially The Passion of the Christ is fictional. If someone can prove the events in the Bible I and the rest of the world would love to hear it.

That's a violation of the charter. Please familiarise yourself with it, particularly rule number three.

Don't discuss this here.

Paddy20

New Irish 'Hope' Org, opens The Passion of Christ website. An interesting new website has been set up in Ireland at:- www.thepassion.ie

Interesting and educational.

P. :ninja:

Seaneh

The Hope organisation bothers me, they seem obsessed with dogmatism and religious ritual and they also seem to play down a relationship with God, it's odd.

Dont Ban Me

Very good film!!

sanvean

Originally posted by Wolfie
I havent seen the movie yet, but from what I have heard, it is violent, but it shows the factual events of the crucifixion.. The crucifixion of Christ *was* violent. Torturing a man, stabbing him and nailing him to a big wooden cross is not exactly pleasant is it? And the Jews being annoyed at the movie? It shows how they acted towards Christ, and the truth hurts for them. The Jews had the decision to crucify Christ or a criminal, and chose Christ. The movie doesnt show the Jews in a good light, but that is the only light they can be shown in, as that is how they played their part in the history of Christs crucifixion.

I think the story is more aimed towards showing the sacrifice of Christ rather than spreading 'the good news'.

I don't really think the Jews were badly portrayed, to be honest. Jesus came across well, so there's a start. Far worse stuff in the Gospels themselves. also, wolfie, I believe you're kind of missing the point re christ's crucifixion. The 'Jews' may have bayed for his death, but he claimed to have gone willingly for the sins of us all. essentially, we, everyone here, before and to come, was that jewish mob. It also seems to be the Pharisees who are the demonised, more so than the Jewish people as a whole.

re the film: unbearably long, concerning itself with the suffering of christ (and yes, I'm aware it was the *passion* of the christ) with nearly ignoring the redemption aspect. The mistakes were off-putting to say the least. And they seem to have given Mary superhuman powers. Basically, not very subtle or intelligent.

As for the certification, does anybody else think this is madness? I'm not going to get into an argument regarding what should be cencored or not, but if they're going to give Starsky and Hutch a 15pg cert and give a film devoting much of its time to the masochistic torture of a man, then something's not quite right.

Yoda

I haven't seen it, but I saw an advert clip on TV. They showed them putting the nails into the palms of his hands. We know, and have known for a long time, that the Romans nailed in the wrist because the hand is too fragile to bear the weight of the body.

One wonders why go to all the trouble of having dialogue in Aramaic and Latin (and why not Greek, the lingua franca of the area?) when they didn't get that other detail right.

A friend of mine did see the film, and sent me this review:

I finally saw The Passion last night. Mel has produced a film that is within a hair's breadth of being a masterpiece, but that hair is noticeable and irritating, like a hair in your mouth. He had the opportunity to make a movie about a man who was willing to be brutally tortured and even more brutally executed for his beliefs -- an utterly compelling topic. Jim Cavaziel, unfortunately, was not up to the task. His phonetic, stilted pronunciation of Aramaic, his flopping and twitching, his inability to portray any emotion other than poorly faked agony, make the central character less of a man and more of a cardboard cutout. Parts of the movie were incredibly effective at evoking emotion: Judas' descent into insanity, the turmoil of Pontius Pilate, the anguish of Mary as she watched her son's slow spiral down to death -- all were heartbreakingly portrayed; but the scenes of torture (while gory, not at all realistic), the superhuman strength of Jesus as he drags what has to be a thousand pounds of lumber up a steep hill after being flogged half to death, the cartoonish Pharisees, the Cecil B. Demille-style destruction of the Temple, and some glaring continuity errors remove you from the viewing experience you had otherwise scarcely realized you were participating in, making you roll your eyes heavenward and mutter under your breath "Oh, come on, Mel!" For those not squeamish, the rewards of watching are definitely there, but patience and fortitude are a pre-requisite.