I have not seen it yet. I plan to go as soon as I get over a chest cold that has taken me out for a bit. But I have been following the hype. I have to say I'm a bit surprised at it.

Anybody seen it? Anybody have a comment?

I saw it.

I wasnt incredibly moved by it, I guess it depends on how religious you are.
Im not a religious person, but I do wonder, so the movie kinda spooked me. because you want to say to yourself, its just a movie, but is it true?

another thing that freaked me out, was when leaving the theatre i saw many people in tears, grown men crying. -so i wonder about the kind of people who go to this kind of movie. or is it anyone who goes and gets such a reaction?

some parts of violence and special effects involving the devil are supposed to be scary or hard to watch but I managed not to look away like most.

one part I really didnt like is that you get a culture shock at the end of the movie when all of a sudden its over and mel gibson's name is displayed in huge bold letters across the screen like he wrote the bible. (or is pretty much taking credit for it) no matter the amount of work he put into it, if he were religious he might be more modest than that.

Everyone I know who has seen it has, prior religious convictions not withstanding, described it as deeply moving, deeply disturbing and "the most violent movie they've ever seen". Considering the subject matter- yeah I get it.
No one has said "Don't see it" But everyone has said to be sure to gear up for it and be ready . There are "Viewer discretion advised" posters at the ticket counters here too.
I have not seen it yet and haven't decided I will. If I do, I'm sure I'll view much of it peeking out from behind my fingers. I don't do well with prolonged graphic torture scenes.
I actually purposely keep watching all of the "making of" specials on TV so that I can remember the CGI / technical /stunt facts during the rough scenes. Hoping it will work as well as when I was a little kid and had to keep saying to myself "It's only a movie. It's only a movie..." . Except like Rellick pointed out- it's not.

I still have not seen the movie.
Relik, thanks for your response.

quote:

---

one part I really didnt like is that you get a culture shock at the end of the movie when all of a sudden its over and mel gibson's name is displayed in huge bold letters across the screen like he wrote the bible. (or is pretty much taking credit for it) no matter the amount of work he put into it, if he were religious he might be more modest than that.

---

Wow that's interesting. I didn't know that. It does sound weird to see his name at a moment like that.

Lila- I'm with you on the graphic violence.

quote:

---

I actually purposely keep watching all of the "making of" specials on TV so that I can remember the CGI / technical /stunt facts during the rough scenes. Hoping it will work as well as when I was a little kid...

---

I've been doing this too! I'm hoping knowing that it's a robot up there and how some of the whipping scenes were done will help.

What I'm really interested is seeing is whether the hopeful elements of this story, which begin only after the death of Jesus, will be foreshadowed. I was disappointed in "Jesus Christ Superstar" because it seemed to end before anything good happens.

Hmm... I dunno, but I think the torment & violence can't be shown graphic enough, in this case.
You know I'm not a christian, N, but I deem the core of Jesus' story one of the most powerful and vital to our understanding of what being human should be in the end. For me it's not important who's son he was supposed to be. To me it's important that his story is the most potent example of uncompromising humanity and compassion, and how it still always ends up on whatever and who's ever cross.
It HAS to be shown in terrifying detail what we still do to those who spoil our dirty, cozy games.
It HAS to be shown what we still do to ourselves.

I haven't seen Gibson's movie, yet, but I hope he'll deal a brutal punch to my gut.

*
The Xenatizer

I'm not a Christian either. I've seen the very graphic extended trailer, but not the film itself. My fear is that it'll spur the more zealous religious types in their modern day "crusades", many of which aren't very peace-and-love at all. We don't need any more of that.

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Xenatizer:
Hmm... I dunno, but I think the torment & violence can't be shown graphic enough, in this case.

---

Just to clarify, I agree with Xenatizer. It's not like anything shown could be criticized as being "gratuitous violence". Sadly, that's the way it happened.
I just know myself & I personally need to prepare myself before I see it cause those kinds of images stick with me and bother me (as they should). I wanna be ready for the punch.

I don't know how historical this film is. There are some things in it that would seem to be most likely inaccurate, though, so that would cause me to look at the rest with a grain of salt. The cross, for example. I understood that those being crucified didn't carry the entire thing. They only carried the crossbeam.

and the nail would have to be driven in the wrist not the palm..... otherwise i would think his weight would pull him (his palm) right out of the nail. even if he was tied to the board.- something technical that was questioned on the discovery channel or some such show.

you *COULD* be really picky with it if you wanted. but thats hardly the point of things.

That's why this movie holds no draw for me. It's meant for believers.

Honestly, I think it's meant for believers in some ways and meant for non-believers in others.

It's meant for believers because it drives the point home to Christians. It's like as a Christian, I "know" what kind of pain Jesus had to endure...but until you see it, you can't quite really picture just what he went through for us. Even though I know seeing Passion will be difficult for me, I think it's something I need to see as a believer. I think this movie is meant to do something to the heart of a believer...it's not just "telling the story" like so many other Jesus movies do.

I also think it's meant for non-believers in the way of that it catches their attention. Any other Jesus movie, prolly not...but this one does. The utter graphicness of it. Do I think it's supposed to turn a non-believer into a believer? *pause* Not really. I think it's just there to make them think, that's all. I mean, I'm sure there's some people where it's had that kind of effect on them, but I think most people...it just makes 'em think.

The Passion was made for both believers and non-believers alike...and I think that's the distinction between this Jesus movie and any other that's been put out there. IMHO.

Some people I know aren't sure if they want to see it-- like part of them do, part them don't. Even though I know it's going to be one of those movies I don't enjoy, I still want to see it. I guess I just want to understand better. That's my goal going into it. But like lila, I guess I'm trying to prepare myself a bit for the graphic violence first. Just pictures alone are shocking to me.

I hadn't spoken up about the movie yet, figuring I would when I saw it...but I just had to say something about the believer/non-believer thing.

~Gabber



"Swept away on a wave of emotion
Overcaught in the eye of the storm
And whenever you smile
I can hardly believe that you're mine

This love is
It's unmistakeable
And each time I look in your eyes
I know why
This love is untouchable
I feel that my heart just can't deny
Each time I look in your eyes
Oh baby, I know why
This love is unbreakable..."

Think about what, though?

That's not meant to provoke, I just wonder what it is we're supposed to be thinking about that we haven't already. I know I'm thinking all the time.

In seeing the trailer I felt very sad. I was sad for many reasons, but mostly because someone I see, from what the available texts would indicate, be he a fictional character or not, as a generally good and kind person was being beaten. I'd feel the same if they showed any one of the many thousands of other good people being brutally killed who historically have been. It doesn't make me think anything that I wouldn't have or hadn't anyway, except maybe to question Mel Gibson's motives a little.

But again, I haven't seen the entire film.

[This message was edited by Heitie on 02 March 2004 at 11:17 PM.]

Xenatizer wrote:
You know I'm not a christian,

Heitie wrote:
I'm not a Christian either.

YaY you 2!

Im not only not a member of ANY religion organised or not..
Im kinda vaguely Anti-religious

In my opinion No One should EVER accept ANYTHING...
just cause they are told too.

(If God exists {HA!} & wants to get MY Attention he will Have to do it his OWNself!)


I think the Brouhaha over this film looks a bit Artificial & Manufactured...Umm Hyped is a word that fits loosely.

I'll probably avoid this til its 2nd run.



Brucy runs out naked into the howling windy freezing winter nite...

WHAT ISSUE ??....WHAT 1 ISSUE ??? ARGHHHHH !!!

I'm not going to presume to think or know what you or anyone else would or would not be thinking, Heitie, when it comes to this movie or the story behind it.

But you gotta admit this much... if it wasn't making you think just a little bit (about what, who knows), you wouldn't be posting in this thread so much.

That's my point. I think this movie is meant to stir up debate, conversation, and maybe even controversy. On both sides. If this thread and the many different conversations I've been hearing in RL are any indication, then this movie has already accomplished that.

~Gabber



"Swept away on a wave of emotion
Overcaught in the eye of the storm
And whenever you smile
I can hardly believe that you're mine

This love is
It's unmistakeable
And each time I look in your eyes
I know why
This love is untouchable
I feel that my heart just can't deny
Each time I look in your eyes
Oh baby, I know why
This love is unbreakable..."

I am a Christian.
I am not planning on seeing it.
Why you ask?
Well, I don't need to see to believe, I know what happened since I read the book, and I think I would end up being more disturbed than anything.

"If God created me in His image, I have more than returned the compliment."

-- Mrs. Betty Bowers

It's interesting to me that no one yet has mentioned going to see this movie for purely historical interest.

I'm not real good with violence, and I'm disappointed that it sounds as though the film is not very historically accurate, but I am interested in seeing how real the movie is to the historical document of the New Testament.

I studied the Bible as an historical document as part of my Bachelor of Arts, which majored in English Literature and History. It was a very interesting historical document, particularly because of all the references to the social customs of Ancient Rome and Judaism during the time it described.

As I said, I'm interested to see how that period in time has been given life on the big screen.

~~~~~~~~~~

Who did you think I would be? - HA! - well you got me instead.

what litle interest i have in seeing it is either cinematic or historical. from what i hear, it's not historically accurate on some points, and pretty close on others. a la Braveheart, i'm guessing. it is just a movie after all...

WHAT WOULD XENA DO?

are you sitting on the soap?

No, Gabrielle. You understand hate, but you don't give in to it. You don't know how much I love...that.

I think I've been scared off seeing it, after reading this thread. I don't do well with gore.

I did like Braveheart though ...

Hmmm, dilemma. I think there are other films I would rather go and see first. Maybe it's a DVD for me to hire in the future.

~~~~~~~~~~

Who did you think I would be? - HA! - well you got me instead.

I still haven’t seen this movie! But I’m going to reply to some of your comments anyway.

First I wonder why no one has mentioned the controversy that was brought up the most which is the question of who killed Jesus. I guess you are all too smart to fall into that trap. I thought the idea that this movie would stir up hostilities towards the Jewish people was a little far fetched.
Heitiewrites:

quote:

---

I was sad for many reasons, but mostly because someone I see, from what the available texts would indicate, be he a fictional character or not, as a generally good and kind person was being beaten. I'd feel the same if they showed any one of the many thousands of other good people being brutally killed who historically have been.

---

I think this is a good point. However, in our dramas today we see a lot of abuse of good people and we are always repaid for that pain by revenge- the bad guy always gets it worse. This story is different because it doesn’t follow that rule. The guy getting the abuse is the good guy and the bad guy never pays. I would think that might make you think, Heitie, at least about the point of telling such a story.

Ulrich- said:

quote:

---

To me it's important that his story is the most potent example of uncompromising humanity and compassion, and how it still always ends up on whatever and who's ever cross.
It HAS to be shown in terrifying detail what we still do to those who spoil our dirty, cozy games.
It HAS to be shown what we still do to ourselves.

---

This is great! To bring it home to us-our games and self delusions. Is that what happens, Ully, to compassion, to love? We crucifiy it? Convincing.

Opus1EJCwrites:

quote:

---

I am a Christian.
I am not planning on seeing it.
Why you ask?
Well, I don't need to see to believe

---

I have to wonder about this plan. Yes you don’t have to see to believe. You believe already- but you had to hear to believe or you never would have.

So, is there no more room in your heart for greater revelation of your faith? Are you perfected already? I know it’s only a movie, one that interprets one man’s vision of the events, but IMHO I wouldn’t turn down the chance to be edified by this vision.

That’s all I’ll say for now. I hope to see it tonight.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nanzar:
I think this is a good point. However, in our dramas today we see a lot of abuse of good people and we are always repaid for that pain by revenge- the bad guy always gets it worse. This story is different because it doesn’t follow that rule. The guy getting the abuse is the good guy and the bad guy never pays. I would think that might make you think, _Heitie_, at least about the point of telling such a story.

---

What I said was that I don't believe this film would make me think about anything I hadn't or wouldn't have already. The concepts presented are not new. I grew up as the child of a Christian minister and I was very active in youth organizations. I've thought about it

What it might do, I'll allow, is make me wonder about the technical side of the film itself; pacing, lighting, direction, etc., but I didn't think that was what was meant before.

My perception of a film's story isn't limited to only what's presented on the screen.

I do think there's been revenge for Jesus's death. There's been violence committed in his name like for no other cause, which some would justify by pointing to his horrific death and saying "see? this is why you're wrong and have to die, because you don't believe in Him even though he suffered for you". The legends of his suffering, death, and perceived deification have been the impetus for some of the most horrid, bloody holy wars in history.

I just the other day received a book I'd ordered on the medieval Crusades. Reading is slow going as I don't have much quiet time, but I look forward to learning the balanced, not put out by the church, story of what happened when many thousands of people sewed crosses onto their clothes and marched east to take back the tomb of their Christ.

First, for anyone not aware, let me state that I am a Christian.

I also have not yet seen the movie, but I plan to as soon as I get a break in work and school.

I agree that the violence is needed in this story in order to convey the meaning, to get the true emotion of the story across. If they were to dilute the torture, it would dilute the meaning and sacrifice.

I remember when I was in eigth grade, at church camp, we watched a film about the crucifiction of Jesus. Nothing in my life has moved me more than that film did.

Understanding the cruelty that was inflicted on Jesus helped me to understand just how much he gave up for us. It helped me to understand what his death meant.

I'm not trying to say that this movie should turn all non-beleivers into beleivers, or that it is meant simply for beleivers. I beleive the movie is intended for all and what they take away from it is a sign of their own beleifs. Some will watch the movie and see a great story, others will watch it and see a document on their faith. Some may see it as a waste of celluloid. Perception depends entirely on the person.

I do find the commercialization of the movie annoying. Selling nail necklaces, and all the memorabilia, that makes it seem like a Disney movie. I mean, they didn't sell Iceberg necklaces when Titanic came out.

On a purely Mod-y note, I'm glad you guys have been keeping this thread civil. I know how emotions can flare when talking about possibly controversial subjects. Keep up the good work.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Maybe it was just the dream of you, and not the reality that I loved.

Two words -
FILM ADAPTATION!

Sorry folks, I just can't put my 'faith' in someone else's interpretation. I do not believe the bible to be the end-all be-all. I think it is a dated document that provides some wonderful points or guidelines for life. I do not believe it to be an accurate depiction of events.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When I reflect upon the number of disagreeable people who I know have gone to a better world, I am moved to lead a different life.

Now THIS interests me.

Historians regard the Bible as historically accurate, at least as far as details such as people, places and events. Just historians - not religious historians.

In fact, the Jewish writer Josephus, who wrote during that period when the death of Jesus took place, makes mention of many of the facts in the biblical account. Other Roman writers of the day make mention of many of the people (eg. Herod, Pontius Pilate) and places (eg. the Temple at Jerusalem, the garden at Gethsemane) spoken about in the crucifiction accounts.

I have no problem with people saying that the moral teaching of the bible doesn't make sense to them. That is every person's right, along with the right of those who want to state their christian beliefs.

However, it's another thing altogether to claim that the text doesn't accurately record events.

According to historical evidence there was a man called Jesus who lived in Jerusalem, claimed to be greater than Herod, was crucified and garnered a following after his death.

In fact, there is more historical evidence for these facts than there is to support the idea that Napoleon was actually at the Battle of Waterloo.

**************************************************

Just re-reading what I've just written I realise that I may have the wrong end of the stick here. It may not have been Shawn's intention to question the entire historical validity of the bible. She may have just been saying that some of the more fantastic events of the crucifiction don't seem believable. I'll buy that.

The part of me that studied the history of the new testament at Uni just felt I had to make the above points.

For the record, we also studied the Iliad and the Odysee in History. There are HUGE parts of those documents that are obviously not historical but, again, many of the events, places and people written about in those books is actually historically acurate. Doesn't mean that this is a reason for people to believe in the Greek gods, though.

~~~~~~~~~~

Who did you think I would be? - HA! - well you got me instead.

If the stories are true, the 'garden at Gethsemene' may have been a cave and not a garden at all. "Gethsemene" apparently means "oil press" (or "olive press", I don't remember) and there's a huge (and very cool looking) cave in the right area that probably had a press in it at the time.

I saw a thing on it the other day on History or Discovery or something. Just thought it was interesting

quote:

---

Originally posted by Argeaux:
In fact, the Jewish writer Josephus, who wrote during that period when the death of Jesus took place, makes mention of many of the facts in the biblical account.

---

Flavius Josephus was born in AD 37, so any information he might have had could've been a little dated. Also I'm finding that the references to Jesus in his text may have been added by Christians years later.

I'd be interested to read good (unbiased, preferably) discussion on this if anyone has any links or book titles to share.