Question about the Mel Gibson movie The Passion - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 05-15-2006, 04:26 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 01:34 AM
Personally, I think the ultimate Christian movie is Left Behind.


...for me to poop on.
__________________

__________________
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 05-15-2006, 10:46 PM   #32
The Fly
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Cheltenham
Posts: 130
Local Time: 01:34 AM
Wasn't this the first mvie actually to be condonned by the head of the Evengenical church in America? According to the Vatican, the Pope watched and approved.

Many ordinary Christians hated it, but when me and a few friends watched it, it made us realise the reality of what Jesus had done for us.

Those who thought that it give rise to anti-semetic feelings were proved wrong because the flim showed that it was mostly the Roman's who were to blame for his crucifixtion.
__________________

__________________
bonsai is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 08:34 AM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
maycocksean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The Most Important State in the Union
Posts: 4,882
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
i liked how pissed Jesus looked at the end of the movie like after he rose from the dead an all.

i bet he's on a Mel Gibson-style revenge quest.

i'll bet this is one pissed-off mofo who's going to do unto others what has totally been done unto his ass.

or so the film seems to say.
funny, I don't even remember the resurrection in this movie. In fact I don't remember much about the movie at all. Even the violence. . .I don't know. . .it's just not "burned on my brain." And I'm a Christian! Strictly from a film perspective, I don't think the movie was that memorable. But different people have different responses. My sister was moved to tears (I think I was too, but as I've said, I've kinda forgotten about it since). My mom won't see it--she think it's too violent. So there you go.

I found the "visual Bible" DVDs "The Gospel of John" and "Matthew" much better. I've used them many times in Bible classes I've taught. I've never used "The Passion of The Christ." And as far as being moved by what Christ has done for humanity, there's pantomime set to music that my drama ministry created that gets to me more than any movie.

I did laugh out loud at your take on Gibson's resurrection, Irvine.
"who's going to do unto others what has totally been done unto his ass." Funny! I'll have to see that part, at least, again.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 09:34 AM   #34
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by bonsai
Those who thought that it give rise to anti-semetic feelings were proved wrong because the flim showed that it was mostly the Roman's who were to blame for his crucifixtion.


really? i thought the depiction of Pilot was very sympathetic, that he was conflicted about the whole thing but had to give the Jewish priest class the blood they wanted. i thought it was particularly notable that his wife (Mrs. Pilot?) gives Mary a cloth to wipe up Jesus' blood.

i also thought some of the Jewish priests were almost Nazi fantasies, hook-nosed and sneering, they hiss and smack Jesus around.

there's no question that the real "bad guys" in the movie are the roman torturers -- especially when we notice the graphic, deliberate extent to which Gibson depicts the scourging of Jesus, like when they slam the whip with the glass into the table, and then pull it off removing chunks of wood, in another classic horror movie move -- but i think there's ample evidence of anti-semitism, or at least Jewish stereotypes (there's that whole thing about money, too), if one wants there to be. you've got to look for it, but i think it's there.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 01:39 PM   #35
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 01:34 AM
I'm curious if you think His mother and followers (all of whom, incidentally, were Jewish) come off as hook-nosed and sneering?
__________________
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 02:00 PM   #36
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977
I'm curious if you think His mother and followers (all of whom, incidentally, were Jewish) come off as hook-nosed and sneering?


no, it was mostly the priests. they hissed, too, and i forget exactly, but there was some issue regarding money. anyway, Christians throughout the centuries have always fogotten that Jesus and his mother were Jewish when it came to crack some Jewish skulls.

and Jesus was freaking hot. those cheekbones! that perfect, smooth torso! watching him be relentlessly beaten by big, burly men in black reminded me of some S&M websites i've come across in my various journeys across the www.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 02:07 PM   #37
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,430
Local Time: 01:34 AM
Quote:
no, it was mostly the priests. they hissed, too
Then perhaps the film is less anti-semitic than it is concerned with the dramatic methods necessary for good storytelling -- and, as you point out, forces of antagonism are clearly divided between sadistic guards and scheming religious officials.

When you're a Jewish man with Jewish followers living in a Jewish culture preaching a message that runs contrary to the ruling Jewish religious elite, your enemies aren't exactly going to be Aryan Neo-Nazis.
__________________
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 02:20 PM   #38
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,493
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977


Then perhaps the film is less anti-semitic than it is concerned with the dramatic methods necessary for good storytelling -- and, as you point out, forces of antagonism are clearly divided between sadistic guards and scheming religious officials.

When you're a Jewish man with Jewish followers living in a Jewish culture preaching a message that runs contrary to the ruling Jewish religious elite, your enemies aren't exactly going to be Aryan Neo-Nazis.


but this is the very genesis of anti-semitism, and you're right, it starts in the employment of dramatic conventions -- make the bad guys ugly and the good guys gorgeous.

he also uses iconography to arouse these passions in his (presumably) devoutly Christian audience. not only are the ruling Jewish elite ugly, but they are stereotypically Jewish in their actions. they are classically anti-Semetic, and the fact that they are just so Jewish in visual language, and that Jesus and Mary are not Jewish in any sort of visual sense, underscores the distinction drawn between potential Christian and unrepentant Jew.

Leon Wieseltier of the New Republic wrote this, and does a far better job expressing it than i could (and i'm slammed at work today, so i've no time to really write my own critique):

[q]The figure of Caiaphas, played with disgusting relish by an actor named Mattia Sbragia, is straight out of Oberammergau. Like his fellow priests, he has a graying rabbinical beard and speaks with a gravelly sneer and moves cunningly beneath a tallit-like shawl streaked with threads the color of money. He is gold and cold. All he does is demand an execution. He and his sinister colleagues manipulate the ethically delicate Pilate into acquiescing to the crucifixion. (You would think that Rome was a colony of Judea.) Meanwhile the Jewish mob is regularly braying for blood. It is the Romans who torture Jesus, but it is the Jews who conspire to make them do so. The Romans are brutish, but the Jews are evil.

[...]

Historiographically speaking, after all, there is no such thing as gospel truth; and so his portrayal of the Jews is based on nothing more than his own imagination of what they looked like and sounded like. And Gibson's imagination has offered no resistance to the iconographical inheritance of Western anti-Semitism. Again, these things are not passively received. They are willingly accepted. Gibson created this movie; it was not revealed to him. Like his picture of Jesus, his picture of the Jews is the consequence of certain religious and cinematic decisions for which he must be held accountable. He has chosen to give millions of people the impression that Jews are culpable for the death of Jesus.

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040...tier030804&c=2

[/q]
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 03:50 PM   #39
Blue Crack Addict
 
U2girl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: slovenija
Posts: 20,951
Local Time: 02:34 AM
I felt the film was too violent, and I agree in that it was anti-Semitic.
__________________
U2girl is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 08:51 PM   #40
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
no, it was mostly the priests. they hissed, too, and i forget exactly, but there was some issue regarding money. anyway, Christians throughout the centuries have always fogotten that Jesus and his mother were Jewish when it came to crack some Jewish skulls.
No, we Christians didn't "forget".

The charge of anti-Semitism on a movie (or play or story, for that matter) that has a cast of primarily Jewish characters (some protagonist, some antagonist) is without merit.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 08:56 PM   #41
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:34 PM
were not the people that followed Christ really the "first Christians"?

and all the "others" the Jews.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 09:04 PM   #42
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 05:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
were not the people that followed Christ really the "first Christians"?

and all the "others" the Jews.
No, they were all Jews.

Theologically speaking, some were "completed Jews".
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 09:17 PM   #43
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:34 PM
And George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock were Englishmen.


However most consider them Americans
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 09:22 PM   #44
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 05:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader

Theologically speaking, some were "completed Jews".

seems like there are always people around have a solution for what is best for the Children of David

Quote:
The "completed Jews" phrase is sometimes used by fundamentalist Christians to refer to Jewish people who convert to Christianity. The phrase is considered offensive to many Jewish groups because it suggests Jews are "incomplete" unless they believe in the divinity of Jesus.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-16-2006, 10:22 PM   #45
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
really? i thought the depiction of Pilot was very sympathetic, that he was conflicted about the whole thing but had to give the Jewish priest class the blood they wanted. i thought it was particularly notable that his wife (Mrs. Pilot?) gives Mary a cloth to wipe up Jesus' blood.
Pilate is portrayed in Catholic tradition as a sympathetic character, mainly due to the pro-Roman bias of the early Church. While, indeed, the Church was persecuted by the Romans prior to the 4th century A.D., once it became the state religion of the Roman Empire, the Church became the Roman Empire's greatest cheerleader in history.

Pilate, himself, is given a purposely ambiguous fate, as their sympathies for the man could never be outweighed by the fact that if he was non-baptized, Catholic tradition states that he would automatically be in hell. However, Pilate's wife is stated to have been a Christian, according to Eastern Christian traditions, and, as such, she is a saint (Saint Procula) in the Eastern Orthodox and Coptic churches.

But, undoubtedly, such an obsession with the Pilate and his wife was driven primarily by anti-Semitism. They are put up as an example in contrast to the Jewish crowds calling for his death, and was used as a basis for anti-Semitism for nearly 2,000 years.

Regardless, it should be noted that Procula (a.k.a., "Claudia") is only given a brief mention in the Bible and doesn't have a name. All of her details have been generated out of post-Biblical tradition.

Melon
__________________

__________________
melon is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com