Question about the Mel Gibson movie The Passion - Page 5 - 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 05-19-2006, 10:04 AM   #61
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977


You qualified the villain's treatment in the film by saying they were "so Jewish." But when presented with Jesus, Peter, John, Mary, the other widows, etc., all of whom were Jewish and who avoid the Shylockian treatment, you suddenly say they're "non-Jewish" precisely because they don't fit the Shylockian treatment. You can't have your cake and eat it too on this one -- your own racism comes into play based on who you think is "truly" Jewish.

woah. hold it right there. my own racism? and you're attributing quotations to words i haven't written.

i am pointing out precisely what Gibson has done -- give the "bad" Jews the Shylock-treatment. this is a well-understood, well-defined historical stereotype, and the priests in the film certainly live up to it, they're almost Nazi fantasies. the "good" jews have none of these Shylock-characteristics. i never said they weren't Jewish, though within the context of the film, they aren't "Jewish." the quotes matter.

it's Gibson, and you, who are trying to have their cake and eat it too. he's using the Shylock stereotype to emotionally batter the audience and give them easy-to-identify bad guys, yet presenting us with non-Shylock Jews as protaganists that gives you a very easy out when it comes to the rather obvious anti-Semitism embedded in the visual presentation of the Jewish priests in the film.

see! they're not all bad! some of my best friends are black!

simply because i am well-versed in the semiotics of anti-Semetic stereotypes does not in any way belie some kind of racism on my part. not in any way.


[q]Which Aryan features are you talking about? Blonde hair? Blue eyes? Which of those do we see in the film? Whose beautiful bodies do we see? A broken, battered one? [/q]

Jesus looked pretty good in the various flashback scenes, especially the one with Mary when he splashes her face with water -- some nice biceps and pectorals there. i suppose his Aryan features are most apparent when you see the lack of any sort of Semetic features, especially if we were to do a side-by-side comparison with Jesus and with the priests.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-19-2006, 10:06 AM   #62
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


Well, but that's it. The Jewish figures that are idolized in Christianity are the ones who avoid the "Shylockian treatment." And that's because of the implication that they are, in fact, "not really Jewish," but instead "Christians."

If the non-Christianized Jews had been given a less stereotypical portrayal, we likely wouldn't be having this discussion.


yup. well said.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-19-2006, 05:07 PM   #63
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 11:51 AM
I didn't see the movie. I don't like blood and guts movies. Christ's suffering is important, but this movie just either preached to the choir or revolted them.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 05-20-2006, 12:57 AM   #64
Acrobat
 
scarlet october's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 467
Local Time: 06:51 AM
One thing that seems to bother me about alot the remarks people are saying is that this movie was anti-Semitic. I don't believe that in the least bit. The jews did not kill Jesus, it was everyone that killed him. He had to be the ultimate sacrifice so that man could go directly to God and our sins would be covered.

But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. ~ Isaiah 53:5

Jesus came to fufill the law not to destroy it. It seems like alot of conceptions are that Christians blame Jews for Jesus' death. When the very fact is Israel is God's chosen people he loved them as a Husband loves his Wife ... in the truest sense. But Israel was unfaithful so God had to come and breakdown the barrier of sin and unfaithfulness so he could be reconciled to his people. Even Moses had foretold the coming of a Messiah. But this forgiveness was not just for the Jews but also for Gentiles ...

he says:
"It is too small a thing for you to be my servant
to restore the tribes of Jacob
and bring back those of Israel I have kept.
I will also make you a light for the Gentiles,
that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth." ~Isaiah 49:6


Peter confirmed this later in Acts 11:1-18 ... check it out good stuff.

Anyways, I guess I went off topic. But the point is Yahweh is the God of all people. People should realize this. I believe you can read too much into things sometimes. I believe The Passion is a great movie. The movie is just meant to remind us that the cross was not some easy thing where he just died and rose and that was it. It was done for a reason and we were bought with a price and Christ had to suffer to take us back from the world ruled by Satan. You may disagree with me but this movie was not anti-semitic ... we all nailed him to the tree.

Sorry for the off topic post but for what it's worth it's my opinion. Thanks for listening.

CoeXisT
__________________
scarlet october is offline  
Old 05-20-2006, 02:32 AM   #65
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,669
Local Time: 05:51 AM
If Jesus came today, so called "christians" would be the first to kill him...

not Jews, Muslims, or anyone else...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 05-20-2006, 06:09 PM   #66
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: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


It is hard to press this line of thinking when it requires you to promote stereotypes to make your point.

This begins to fall in line with the recent trend of challenging portrayals of villains in film.

If the principle is we shouldn't vilify any given racial, ethnic or religious group as antagonists (even if the same racial, ethnic or religious group is also shown in a protagonist role), you need to go back and review a much larger body of film and come to similar conclusions - otherwise, selective application of the principle reveals that is done for purposes other than highlighting true bigotry.
Melon and Irvine have done a good job of clarifying my point, but just to make sure. . .

The issue here is NOT that Jews were cast as antagonists. It's what the Jewish antagonists LOOK like, physically. The choices Gibson made play into racist stereotypes.

Here's another example that's been kind of bugging me. On Desperate Housewives (I don't know if anyone watches this show or not, but nonetheless) they've had this storyline with this scary, mentally challenged black guy who has a thing for the pretty white girl next door. This guy has already murdered one pretty white girl. This storyline drives me just a little nuts. . .that in this day and age a TV show would play so blithely and gracelessly into one of the most disgusting racist tropes out there is appalling to me. It's the same thing as in the Passion. When there are harmful racial stereotypes out there I think it's just irresponsible to play to them. Why not make it a big scary, mentally challenged white guy? Why not make the evil Jewish leaders with Aryan noses and golden beards?
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 05-20-2006, 08:11 PM   #67
Acrobat
 
scarlet october's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Maryland
Posts: 467
Local Time: 06:51 AM
I may be wrong on this but sometimes people read things into things that aren't there such as racial stereotypes ... I'm not saying they don't exsist. But sometimes things that aren't there people will read too much into something.

In The Passion for example, yes Jim Caviezel is white but they changed his complection and eye color to fit with the movie. I think in the movie they did a good job making him look like he is indeed from the middle-east.



On 'Desperate House Wives' I don't watch the show so I can't say with that situation.

The way I look at it is people are people. I don't see a tv show and when they cast a certain person, look at the color of his skin. God created us all in his image. Color shouldn't be as big of an issue as it is these days. Yes, where we come from and our heritage is important. But when it comes down to it we are all the same underneath our skin. We are all humans. We are all God's creation.

I guess maybe I view things weirdly.
__________________
scarlet october is offline  
Old 05-21-2006, 10:44 AM   #68
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: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by scarlet october
I may be wrong on this but sometimes people read things into things that aren't there such as racial stereotypes ... I'm not saying they don't exsist. But sometimes things that aren't there people will read too much into something.

In The Passion for example, yes Jim Caviezel is white but they changed his complection and eye color to fit with the movie. I think in the movie they did a good job making him look like he is indeed from the middle-east.



On 'Desperate House Wives' I don't watch the show so I can't say with that situation.

The way I look at it is people are people. I don't see a tv show and when they cast a certain person, look at the color of his skin. God created us all in his image. Color shouldn't be as big of an issue as it is these days. Yes, where we come from and our heritage is important. But when it comes down to it we are all the same underneath our skin. We are all humans. We are all God's creation.

I guess maybe I view things weirdly.
I agree that sometimes people read too much into things that "aren't there" but I'm not sure that The Passion is one of those films. Understand, I'm not against the movie. I'm a Christian and I believe it is important to contemplate Christ's suffering. The movie does a creditable job of encouraging the faithful to do that. However, it does have flaws and one of them, was in the casting choices.

I don't think you view things weirdly at all--I admire and share your views about what we share in common in the human family, but perhaps there is some naivete in your thinking. I find this often with well-intentioned friends who just assume that everyone is as color-blind as they are. It's kind of like a "Well, I don't see color when I look at someone else, so no one else does either." Your right, color shouldn't be that big of an issue as it is these days, but sadly it is. And we can't make it not an issue by all just trying to pretend that it's not.

Understand when I saw the Passion I didn't see any anti-Semitism either. That doesn't mean it wasn't there. It just means that I didn't see it because I don't have anti-Jewish prejudice and I haven't witnessed much anti-Semitism in the communties I've lived in. Our failure to see anit-Semitism is evidence of our innocence about such things. It is not evidence of a lack anti-Semitism in the film.
__________________
maycocksean is offline  
Old 05-21-2006, 10:18 PM   #69
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 03:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by maycocksean
The issue here is NOT that Jews were cast as antagonists. It's what the Jewish antagonists LOOK like, physically. The choices Gibson made play into racist stereotypes.

Here's another example that's been kind of bugging me. On Desperate Housewives (I don't know if anyone watches this show or not, but nonetheless) they've had this storyline with this scary, mentally challenged black guy who has a thing for the pretty white girl next door. This guy has already murdered one pretty white girl. This storyline drives me just a little nuts. . .that in this day and age a TV show would play so blithely and gracelessly into one of the most disgusting racist tropes out there is appalling to me. It's the same thing as in the Passion. When there are harmful racial stereotypes out there I think it's just irresponsible to play to them. Why not make it a big scary, mentally challenged white guy? Why not make the evil Jewish leaders with Aryan noses and golden beards?
Another great example. While I've not watched Desperate Housewives, I get the impression that there are many villians through the storylines - yet only certain ones are deemed unacceptable. The goes to the essence of political correctness. A white female villian - no one blinks an eye. A black male villian - its racist.

The focus on the Jewish antagonists in the Passion is to the exclusion of any attention on the Jewish protagonists. It does not create a valid analysis of the film, but rather tries to tie the film to anti-semetic messages existing elsewhere.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-21-2006, 11:14 PM   #70
Refugee
 
4U2Play's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: California
Posts: 1,791
Local Time: 04:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
The focus on the Jewish antagonists in the Passion is to the exclusion of any attention on the Jewish protagonists. It does not create a valid analysis of the film, but rather tries to tie the film to anti-semetic messages existing elsewhere.

I agree with your point here, nbcrusader, but it is not the viewer's fault that the focus of the controversy centered on the Jewish antagonists, rather than the Jewish protagonists.

That is Gibson's fault.

He knew going in what kind of film he wanted to make, and he made it. Good for him. I believe in free speech, etc, but I also believe that one shouldn't whine and cry about criticism of your art when you go out of your way to provoke that very criticism.

If Gibson would have cast Brad Pitt and Colin Farrell as the evil rabbis, then maybe everyone would have been able to concentrate on the Christ story, instead of getting their knickers in a twist over a couple of guys with big noses.

Then again, Gibson would still be excoriated because no one would believe that Brad Pitt could possibly be so evil, except for when he dumped Jennifer, what an asshole.
__________________
4U2Play is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 09:54 AM   #71
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Another great example. While I've not watched Desperate Housewives, I get the impression that there are many villians through the storylines - yet only certain ones are deemed unacceptable. The goes to the essence of political correctness. A white female villian - no one blinks an eye. A black male villian - its racist.

The focus on the Jewish antagonists in the Passion is to the exclusion of any attention on the Jewish protagonists. It does not create a valid analysis of the film, but rather tries to tie the film to anti-semetic messages existing elsewhere.


tell me, how do you feel about representations of fundamentalist Christians in the media?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 01:12 PM   #72
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 03:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
tell me, how do you feel about representations of fundamentalist Christians in the media?
Between the misuse of terms like "fundamentalist," evangelical," etc. and the general distaste for the core message, I don't find any pleasure in the media's representation of Christians (and some can get downright mean and offensive). But then again, I am not surprised and it does not affect who I am.
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 02:15 PM   #73
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader


Between the misuse of terms like "fundamentalist," evangelical," etc. and the general distaste for the core message, I don't find any pleasure in the media's representation of Christians (and some can get downright mean and offensive). But then again, I am not surprised and it does not affect who I am.


so you undestand, then, when traditionaly marganalized, stereotyped groups get irritated when they see traditional stereotypes that have been used to deny them rights (i.e., black men want to rape white women; gay men are pedophiles; Jews conspire and control money) and further their social stigmitizaion?

and especially when these stereotypes are called upon by a director in order to increase the "bad-ness" level of the antagonists? that the more stereotypically they are drawn in the traditional caricature, the more the director is wielding racism/homophobia/anti-Semitism as a dramatic device in order to emotionally blackmail an audience?

do you understand the nervousness such groups might feel when they see these stereotypes -- which they tend to be very adept at sniffing out because they have to constantly battle these stereotypes and are continually put in the position of having to "educate" the majority -- manipulated for easy drama?
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 04:24 PM   #74
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 03:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by maycocksean




Here's another example that's been kind of bugging me. On Desperate Housewives (I don't know if anyone watches this show or not, but nonetheless) they've had this storyline with this scary, mentally challenged black guy who has a thing for the pretty white girl next door. This guy has already murdered one pretty white girl. This storyline drives me just a little nuts. . .that in this day and age a TV show would play so blithely and gracelessly into one of the most disgusting racist tropes out there is appalling to me. It's the same thing as in the Passion. When there are harmful racial stereotypes out there I think it's just irresponsible to play to them. Why not make it a big scary, mentally challenged white guy? Why not make the evil Jewish leaders with Aryan noses and golden beards?



I have seen most of the Housewives episodes and I ask myself questions like yours from time to time.


I think you are off the mark here.


There have been black characters, that were either policemen or detectives? Law enforcement = good.

Also, Bree's (white) son killed Gabbie's mother-in-law and Bree covered it up. Is Bree a killer? And what about Paul, a kid-napper and killer. And Paul's son a stalker- psycho.

Sorry, I think this is more about your perceptions
than about the show.

not to say there are not bad stereotypes on TV.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 05-22-2006, 07:45 PM   #75
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: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep





I have seen most of the Housewives episodes and I ask myself questions like yours from time to time.


I think you are off the mark here.


There have been black characters, that were either policemen or detectives? Law enforcement = good.

Also, Bree's (white) son killed Gabbie's mother-in-law and Bree covered it up. Is Bree a killer? And what about Paul, a kid-napper and killer. And Paul's son a stalker- psycho.

Sorry, I think this is more about your perceptions
than about the show.

not to say there are not bad stereotypes on TV.
I'm not sure why it's so difficult to get acrosswhat seems to me to be a very simple point here. . .

I'm not complaining that "black people are portrayed negatively on Desperate Housewives" or that "white people are always the good guys." My gosh, we're talking about DH here--this is a soap opera--everybody's got dirty laundry. The issue is NOT that blacks are portrayed negatively--it's the one specific portrayal that bothers me. I know free expression and all that so I'm not arguing it shouldn't be allowed. . .I'm just saying when less than fifty years ago a black man could be lynched for being accused of looking at a white woman, when even today when I drive south from Ohio to Florida with my wife (who is white) we encounter occasional dirty looks and middle fingers, when the fear of the dark, dangerous black man preying on the pure white woman is part of our national subconscious, it is irresponsible on the part of the artist to play into those fears.

It's not to say that blacks or Jews or gays (or anyone else for that matter) shouldn't ever be portrayed negatively. It IS to say that stereotypical negative portrayals that encourage/confirm people's worst prejudices and fears are unfortunate and destructive. And while I'll never say such portrayals should be banned we can certainly call them out for what they are.

I wouldn't have a problem with a black character doing what Bree has done, or Paul or Gabbie or any thing else. The ONLY thing I object to is the decision to have dumb, scary, big black man killing pretty young white girls. I think such a portrayal is hurtful to black and white--to all of us.

And back to topic, same with the portrayal of the Jewish leaders in the Passion.
__________________

__________________
maycocksean 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 06:51 AM.


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