|
Post by nightfalcawk on Feb 26, 2004 15:47:26 GMT -5
Well, the Passion debate rages out there so let's bring it in here. First of all, I want to say one thing: I am not an anti-semite. I have many Jewish friends. But I will say this, and to keep it from sounding racist remember that I suck at analogies. Second, I say the film should not be contraversial. I saw Rabbi on TV saying that Gibson is opening the door to hate. What about holocaust movies? They display negative veiws of German people. Christ was a Jew. The Jews in Nazi Germany were German. Are those Nazi films controversial because they portray Germans as genocidal? If anything it should get people mad at the Italians and we're not getting worried about it. The only people who become anti-semetic from seeing this film probably are no too bright and trailer trash. Anyway, that was my DUODENARII.
|
|
|
Post by TheOne19 on Feb 26, 2004 15:58:46 GMT -5
It's just a movie, they should really just relax...and stuff.
I would hope that whoever is denouncing this movie has at least seen it. Remember Jesse Jackson complaining about Barbershop without even seeing one frame of the movie?
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Feb 26, 2004 19:11:59 GMT -5
Yep and you know what? Those trailer trash and bible thumpers surround me in this place. You know what? I didn't even hear about this movie until Tuesday and guess what? I still don't care. It's just some dumb movie that Mel Gibson made to get some jack. He needed his face everywhere and he found the easiest way in the world to do that. Through religion.
Utter stupidity and lunacy will probably follow this movie, and I still, really, just do not give a damn.
Servo
|
|
|
Post by TheNorthSea on Feb 26, 2004 22:43:38 GMT -5
That’s fine if you don’t want to see the movie, but I have to disagree that Mel only did it to have his face everywhere. I don’t think someone would want their movie to be called Anti-Semitic, or go to the extent of filming in locations the people think were the exact places that happened, or try to put the words spoken in the exact language. If all Mel Gibson is trying to do with this film is gain fame, then he made his claims of following Jesus very convincing. Most people would probably have gone a different route, like attacking Christianity. That would be the easier one in my mind. I hope lunacy and stupidity won’t follow the movie, once people see the message behind it, rather than the hype on hate, then maybe they’ll actually think about the movie.
I want to see the Passion because I want to see a film that does Jesus justice. Some Jesus films are just plain cheesy, where as this one does try to be as realistic as possible.
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Feb 26, 2004 22:52:29 GMT -5
Yeah, I agree that it is trying to be a realistic as possible. But, I'm still going to regard it in the same respect that I regard the version of the Bible most people use, and that is as a historical reference. I don't see how people can be upset over history, but, it happens all the time, especially when it's history most people let govern the way they live their lives.
But, religion, along with politics, are things that I don't discuss because it generally leads to someone being chastised for their beliefs (most times me)
Just my opinions though,
Servo
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Feb 26, 2004 23:19:22 GMT -5
I have some thoughts...
I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on it as a film. However, I've read the book it's based on quite a few times, and- from what I understand- Gibson is staying pretty true to the source. And I have been keeping up with the press maelstrom surrounding the film.
Regarding anti-Semitism, I think it's a whole lot of smoke with no fire. I'm amazed at how many people overlook the fact that Jesus, Mary, the 12 Apostles, and pretty much the entire Christian church for the first century were all Jews. I liked Gibson's response in the ABC interview: "Well, there weren't any Norwegians around."
From a Christian theological standpoint, the answer to the question, "Who killed Christ?" is "Anyone who sinned." That means me, for sure. I think the idea that equates Christianity with Racism is a terrible and grossly inaccurate dodge used by people who don't want to deal with a greater issue: what if Christianity is true?
As for Gibson's role in all of this, I think he's an artist using the only medium he knows, in order to tell a story/paint a picture that is meaningful to him.
So where is the ACLU defending his right to free speech? Where are the bastions of tolerance urging us to allow Gibson his freedom to express himself? Oh yeah, they're the ones telling him how intolerant he's being.
Makes sense to me.
Again, I haven't seen the film, but it sounds like many people are finding it too violent. From a strictly medical perspective, I can't see how crucifixion could be realistically portrayed any other way. But if in an attempt to show shocking realism, the violence turns people off, that would be sad. Because it really is a great story and what perfect drama is all about.#nosmileys
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Feb 26, 2004 23:20:23 GMT -5
I think you should be a bit more respectful. To who? Mel? I think not. I don't force my beliefs on others just as I don't think others should force me to respect their beliefs. That's what freedom is about man, sorry if I offended you with my attack on Mel, didn't know he meant that much to you, Servo
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Feb 27, 2004 0:06:09 GMT -5
I think Forrest was commenting on the implications in your post. Namely, implying that all Christians are either trailer trash or Bible thumpers (or both).
And accusing Gibson of trying to make a profit on religion is pretty agressive, especially when you admitted not even knowing about the film until last Tuesday. Accusing anyone of that egregious a crime with no evidence but your opinion is a bit disrespectful.
|
|
|
Post by Phantom Engineer on Feb 27, 2004 0:41:03 GMT -5
Seems like every time there's a movie that organized religion protests about it just makes the movie more successful. If they don't like it they should just shut up and let it pass.
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Feb 27, 2004 1:40:07 GMT -5
I think Forrest was commenting on the implications in your post. Namely, implying that all Christians are either trailer trash or Bible thumpers (or both). And accusing Gibson of trying to make a profit on religion is pretty agressive, especially when you admitted not even knowing about the film until last Tuesday. Accusing anyone of that egregious a crime with no evidence but your opinion is a bit disrespectful. I was just going by what the poster of this said. You guys haven't seen fanatics of religion either until you live in Montgomery Alabama. I live with it every day. A church on every corner. Hell, we couldn't buy a beer on Sunday until October of last year. No lottery. I'm sure you've all heard about the Ten Commandments debacle. And I'm sorry I offended all you Mel Gibson fans. That I will take back. No, not all Christians are trailer trash or bible thumpers, but, most do try to impress their ideals on those who really just don't want the ideals impressed upon them. And, when you're like me and live in a place that has yet to figure out the concept of seperation of church and state, you tend to hold a more vigorous attitude towards it than others do. As always, it's just my opinion, and, as I said before, it's something I don't like to discuss, but, I will explain my side, Servo
|
|
|
Post by losingmydignity on Feb 27, 2004 2:15:36 GMT -5
A friend of mine, one whose opinions I trust, saw it tonight. Apparently the real problem with this film, according to him, is the overuse of slow motion so that Christ isssssssssssss moooooooooovviiiiiiiiinggggggg likkkkkkkkkkkkkee thiissssssssssssssssssssssssss. If it weren't such a serious subject the filmmaking itself sounds riffable--i'm not advocating anyone do this!
The problem with this film may well be it's just plain bad.
|
|
|
Post by BobJohnson on Feb 27, 2004 10:01:14 GMT -5
I'm staying out of this one
|
|
TomServo69
Moderator Emeritus
Gone but not Forgotten
Nothing ever changes........
Posts: 5,467
|
Post by TomServo69 on Feb 27, 2004 15:35:06 GMT -5
Well, It was an excellent movie, and I am Christian, though not a Church goer, and I respect Mel Gibson, and I saw The Passion yesterday, and it was very well done. To call it a bad film before seeing it is ignorrant, to call it anti-Jew is ignorrant too, and it simply could not be MiSTifyed. Also, Mike and Joel and Paul Chaplin are all Christains themselves. It was an excellent film. But I will never see it again. Too intense, but a good reminde for what Jesus did. And whether you don't believe Jesus was the son of God, or you did, one thing is fact, the man did exist, and he was beaten and killed in the most harsh way imaginable. To make fun of that is disrespectful, period. I don't try to force my beliefs on other people, nor do I go to church every sunday (I haven't been to church in 3 years), but I do bleieve in God and Jesus, so disrespect Mel Gibson all you want, just dont stereotype Christians. Sure, Christians have had ups and downs, the old Catholic church was one of the most corrupt powers in history. And there are fanatics. But we're not all like that. It's like saying all MST fans are middle-age geeks who still live with their mothers. True. I suppose it's the environment I'm subjected to every day. Here, there are more churches and banks in the phone directory than anything else. Like I mentioned before, I couldn't buy a beer on Sunday until last October. We don't have a lottery to help education, because the Baptist lobbyists and politicians around here have deemed it evil, yet, we have the next to worst education system in the United States. Of course, when a property tax was suggested, that was shot down to. But, our prayer, as many signs in yards around here suggest, will help our schools. It's not all Christians, as I suppose I suggested earlier, just the one's around here. They're hypocritical and influential. I mean, it's truly ridiculous. I'm sorry if it was conveyed that I was poking fun at the subject matter of the movie, because, I'm not. It's a historical matter and, as a historian, to me, that would be like poking fun at the Holocaust. Once more, just what I have to live with and my opinion about it, Servo
|
|
|
Post by CherokeeJack on Feb 27, 2004 15:42:08 GMT -5
Im not a christian anymore. I've switched sides and jumped the rope to paganism (shock!). I'm dieing to see this film. My friends saw it (without me. grrr...) and they liked it. I want to see it because Mel did Braveheart and Braveheart is one of my faves. From what I've seen of it (clips and what not, I really respect the fact it isnt in English), it looks incredible. I'm seeing it for the pure movie aspects of it all and not the fact some see it as a "christian" movie. Kundun was never really considered a "Budhist" movie. I just want to see it because it looks like a real good movie.
Anyway, I'll catch it when they crowds die down. My best to Mel and its about time they made another big bugdet Jesus movie.
|
|
|
Post by TV's Cowboy on Feb 27, 2004 17:06:09 GMT -5
To organize protests against this movie seems kind of ridiculous and it usually does the opposite of what it was supposed to do. The people who protest this movie(And no I'am not blaming any religious groups in this just anyone who decides to protest a film)are not going to prevent movie goers from seeing this film and if anything its just going to give the movie more publicity which would lead to more money for the filmmakers. Heck all those religious protests against Dogma probably made that film more popular.
But with that said I might see the Passion of Christ but I'll probably just wait for the video/DVD release.
|
|