Rejected By Hollywood For Playing Jesus?

[MrsSpringsteen]

Playing Jesus, or being associated with that particular movie? I can't believe he couldn't/can't get work in Hollywood, he's a beautiful looking man. Never saw the Passion Of The Christ...I think I saw a movie he was in w/ JLo? I did see Frequency.

Is it that or maybe he's just not an actor who doesn't fit into some Hollywood mold? Mel Gibson got work after Passion- and even with all of his issues, he certainly hasn't been rejected by many people in Hollywood. He seems to have plenty of defenders and friends there. His career now is obviously more about those issues. What about other actors who have played Jesus? Of course there haven't been all that many, lately.



The man who played Jesus Christ in Mel Gibson's much criticized "Passion of the Christ," says the role has been his "cross to bear," and that Hollywood has shunned him ever since making the film.

Jim Caviezel, who, before taking the role of Jesus, was a rising Hollywood star with strong reviews for his work in "Frequency," and "The Thin Red Line," told an audience at First Baptist Church of Orlando on Saturday that Gibson begged him to reconsider taking the gig.

"He said, 'You'll never work in this town again,'" Caviezel remembered. "I told him, 'We all have to embrace our crosses.'"

Caviezel recounted a similar story in 2004, when he spoke of the encounter in an interview with the 700 Club.

"The next day, he said, 'I want you to be aware of what you are going to go through. You may never work again.' He said that several times publicly. I told him, 'Mel, this is what I believe. We all have a cross to carry. I have to carry my own cross. If we don't carry our crosses, we are going to be crushed under the weight of it. So let's go and do it.' And we began with the film.

The filmmaker proved prophetic; the film was slammed for perceived anti-semitism, and roles have been hard to come by, as Caviezel says he was "rejected by [his] own industry."

Following "Passion," he starred in the small thriller "Unknown," had a supporting role in the Denzel Washington film "Deja Vu," and headlined absolute bombs "Outlander," and "The Stoning of Soraya M."


Jim Caviezel speaks: Jim Caviezel speaks in Orlando - OrlandoSentinel.com

 

[BVS]

Was he "shunned" because he played Jesus or is it because he gave shows like the 700 Club respect?

Or maybe just because he made some really poor movie choices since then?

According to IMBD he has 4 movies in production and he's done 11 total since after Passion.

To me it sounds like he's just trying to be a martyr.

 

[corianderstem]

Yeah, I can't find much sympathy for someone who's basically saying "I'm not as famous as I was supposed to be."

 

[Canadiens1131]

Maybe he should get rid of that shitty last name.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Maybe he should get rid of that shitty last name.

What about Zach Galifianakis ? Not saying that's shitty-but difficult to pronounce or spell? He could have been cool and just called himself Zach G.

 

[80sU2isBest]

Was he "shunned" because he played Jesus or is it because he gave shows like the 700 Club respect?/QUOTE]

Hollywood actors do a lot crazier things, without repercussion, than appear on 700 club.

To me it sounds like he's just trying to be a martyr.

Or it could be that he's telling the truth the way he sees it.

Who knows...

 

[Jive Turkey]

Or, you know, maybe he stopped getting work after starring in a shitty movie because he starred in a shitty movie. Just like countless other actors who have lost work after starring in shitty movies.

 

[Headache in a Suitcase]

He was a costar with denzel right after the passion... the movie stunk. What acting did he do in passion anyways? He just pretended to get the shit beat out of him for a few hours.

 

[deep]

But the actor noted that Gibson wasn't far off the mark when he spoke of the damage playing Jesus could do to his career.

"Jesus is as controversial now as he has ever been," Caviezel said. "Not much has changed in 2,000 years. The same group of people that wanted Jesus dead are the same people that wield a lot of influence in Hollywood now."

 

[INDY500]

He drove the pace car for the 2002 Indianapolis 500. All downhill after that.

 

[U2DMfan]

Robert Powell was hurt by portraying Jesus because of how incredible the performance was (typecast) and his likeness (image search him).

While Willem Dafoe and Caviezel played controversial Jesus roles, only one of those roles was actually offensive to liberal Christians or a general non-Christian audience.I can't recall a single movie that has offended me as much as that horrid piece of tripe. And that's not even getting into the antisemitism argument.

I literally couldn't stomach that shit. And believe me...that's saying a lot. I don't think it is his relation to Mel Gibson that hurts him or even playing Jesus. It was that he made a slasher flick...starring as Jesus...and agreed to it.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Maybe I'm just really tired-but where did you see the last part, about the same group that wanted Jesus dead...? I can't see it in the Sentinel article. I saw the 2000 years part.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

I don't think it is his relation to Mel Gibson that hurts him or even playing Jesus. It was that he made a slasher flick...starring as Jesus...and agreed to it.

I think that's such a good point. I've never seen the movie because I'm not into slasher movies, or into seeing Jesus being depicted that way for the sake of anyone's agenda. It's all been written, I can read it and imagine it and it means just what it means for me-not for Mel Gibson or anyone else.

 

[U2DMfan]

I'm biased against it, that's for sure.

I can't really be offended (by much) or grossed out under most all circumstances.
I have a crude sense of humor, am not remotely religious, and am surely a proponent of free speech and against most all censorship. In other words, I am basically game for most anything. But I literally couldn't deal with that movie.

Maybe it was my old Christianity and residual affection for Jesus coming through...I just COMPLETELY detested it.

I would say that people should just watch Jesus of Nazareth. Maybe it's a fairy tale too but at least kids can learn something from it w/r/t how to treat others.

 

[Pearl]

Caviezel could also be having a hard time in Hollywood because he doesn't do any sex scenes, which are common in movies. I remember he said he won't do them when Passion came out.

I didn't like Passion at all. The way I see it, if a non-Christian who knew nothing of the life of Christ saw it, they wouldn't understand much of why Jesus was crucified. Passion was made for committed Christians and not for a wider audience, thus making it exclusive. Not a good idea for a movie.

 

[Canadiens1131]

What about Zach Galifianakis ? Not saying that's shitty-but difficult to pronounce or spell? He could have been cool and just called himself Zach G.

I'd say it's all about packaging. Zach plays a neckbearded, awkward, deadpan humour guy so it's less important.

 

[Pearl]

I would say that people should just watch Jesus of Nazareth. Maybe it's a fairy tale too but at least kids can learn something from it w/r/t how to treat others.

I agree. That is probably the best Jesus movie ever. I wonder why its not on TV like it used to be. You could only catch parts of it on Catholic stations.

 

[Irvine511]

it can be difficult to get work when what you're known for is being the object of desire in a homoerotic snuff film widely praised for it's verisimilitude of graphic and yet historically inaccurate bloodletting no matter how good looking you are. his association with perhaps the most unpleasant film i've ever seen -- further compounded by the fact that some people found something spiritually exalting in all that violence and subjected their children to it cementing in their minds the apparently redemptive power of flesh-removing cinematic violence in the eyes of a God who set this whole torture thing up -- probably didn't help his career.

but this really just seems like whining.

 

[80sU2isBest]

I'm biased against it, that's for sure.

I can't really be offended (by much) or grossed out under most all circumstances.
I have a crude sense of humor, am not remotely religious, and am surely a proponent of free speech and against most all censorship. In other words, I am basically game for most anything. But I literally couldn't deal with that movie.

Maybe it was my old Christianity and residual affection for Jesus coming through...I just COMPLETELY detested it.

I would say that people should just watch Jesus of Nazareth. Maybe it's a fairy tale too but at least kids can learn something from it w/r/t how to treat others.

Jesus Of Nazareth is indeed the best movie / miniseries about Jesus, as far as I'm concerned. It got some things out of order and focused on a harmless subplot that may or may not have actually occurred, but it was very close to the Biblical account of what actually happened.

As far as Passion is concerned, what you see as "slasher", many people see as an accurate portrayal of what Jesus willingly went through to affect redemption for us. Personally, I closed my eyes during the most brutal parts of the film. I don't consider it "slasher", but it was too much for me. That's really a shame, because there were some very good moments during the film, my favorites being Christ's encounter with Satan in the garden (which may or may not have happened) and Christ remembering his mother picking him up when he fell and skinned his knee as a child.

 

[U2DMfan]

I agree. That is probably the best Jesus movie ever. I wonder why its not on TV like it used to be. You could only catch parts of it on Catholic stations.

Absolutely the best Jesus film/mini-series I've ever seen by a MILE.
I'm pretty sure the religious stations play it on Easter and Christmas.

Again, I may not buy into it as literal 'gospel' anymore but it's such an inspired, hopeful, great piece of work. Great cast as well.

the most unpleasant film i've ever seen --

Agreed, Irv.

 

[Irvine511]

i will agree that i think Gibson is an effective filmmaker. Apocalypto is sickeningly violent at points, but damn, it certainly is thrilling. "Passion" was likewise effective in many ways, i'm just aghast at what it was saying.

my understanding, and i'm obviously not a biblical scholar, was that much of the violence in the film isn't in the gospels, like the scouring -- where they rip his flesh off piece by piece. furthermore, he would have lost so much blood that he would have died or at least passed out before he even began carrying the cross.

what always struck me was how ordinary this was. the film presents the crucifixion as the most heinous act ever, but many, many people other than Jesus were crucified throughout history, it was relatively commonplace as a form of capital punishment.

at least that's my understanding.

 

[80sU2isBest]

my understanding, and i'm obviously not a biblical scholar, was that much of the violence in the film isn't in the gospels, like the scouring -- where they rip his flesh off piece by piece. furthermore, he would have lost so much blood that he would have died or at least passed out before he even began carrying the cross.

what always struck me was how ordinary this was. the film presents the crucifixion as the most heinous act ever, but many, many people other than Jesus were crucified throughout history, it was relatively commonplace as a form of capital punishment.

Yes, it was commonplace, but that doesn't make it any less brutal.

Before the sheer torture of the cross, Christ received 39 lashes from a whip with a bone or metal tip. That would rip your flesh off. Many others also received lashes from the same weapon, and many did die from that.

Jesus also had a crown of thorns shoved down into his head, and on the cross, he refused the drink that was intended to "calm his nerves".

I personally believe that the spiritual aspect of what was happening (the weight of the sins of the world) killed him as much as the physical.

 

[nathan1977]

Without getting into the lust discussion, which seems to be grist for another mill...

Hollywood casts based on type. Jim Carrey is a type. Harrison Ford is a type. Denzel Washington is a type. Julia Roberts is a type. When actors rebel against type, generally speaking, they get nowhere. (Julia in dramas, Jim Carrey dramas, Harrison in a Russian accent, etc.) This is true not just of actors, but of roles, a few of which become iconic types unto themselves. As a result, whoever plays those roles becomes forever associated with them, and can't get out from under the weight. Christopher Reeve in Superman. Mark Hamill in Star Wars. I would add Caviezel to that list.

Nor do I think Caviezel is whining. Mark Hamill has talked about his frustration at not getting other parts in interviews, as did Chris Reeve. It's hard to be an actor who wants to be stretched creatively, only to find that Hollywood will only let you stretch so far.

Despite its popularity both domestically and abroad, The Passion was not popular in Hollywood. (Much of that having to do with Mel himself, who is, has been, and continues to be a polarizing figure, and not without justification -- it will be interesting to see how his "The Beaver" does this year.) "The Passion" did alert Hollywood to the fact that there is a certain audience for faith-based films, but its understanding of that audience is very thin. The Blind Side, which embraced and was embraced by the faith community, is not generally perceived in Hollywood as a faith-based film...probably because it, um, has stars and is good.

 

[Liesje]

Yeah I feel real sorry for someone who starred in a movie that grossed $370,782,930. Please

 

[bonocomet]

This guy did pretty well after playing Jesus two years before becoming a major character for 6 years on one of TVs biggest shows ever. (Henry Ian Cusick)

 

[maycocksean]

This guy did pretty well after playing Jesus two years before becoming a major character for 6 years on one of TVs biggest shows ever. (Henry Ian Cusick)

Ah Desmond. . .

His portrayal of Christ in the Gospel of John was quite good I thought. I really liked that film.

 

[nathan1977]

This guy did pretty well after playing Jesus two years before becoming a major character for 6 years on one of TVs biggest shows ever. (Henry Ian Cusick)

True, but The Gospel of John didn't have the kind of release and box office success that can lock someone into a role for life.

And -- not to name-drop -- but Henry is a very cool guy, BTW.

 

[bonocomet]

True, but The Gospel of John didn't have the kind of release and box office success that can lock someone into a role for life.

And -- not to name-drop -- but Henry is a very cool guy, BTW.

I'll agree with that on both counts

 

[U2DMfan]

It was then that the Lord speaketh and said "I have read thine hand, and it shall henceforth be decreed, that it is Not Penny's Boat."

All I really remember of this movie is Harvey Keitel as the worst possible Judas, with a Brooklyn accent and an orange wig. "'Ey, Jesus, where we goin' next? You know what? Fugeddaboudit." Yikes.

Horrid casting.

Frankly Keitel is the exact same in everything. That is, shitty.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

This guy did pretty well after playing Jesus two years before becoming a major character for 6 years on one of TVs biggest shows ever. (Henry Ian Cusick)

Cool-I didn't know that. Maybe that was a Lost clue