http://re2.mm-a.yimg.com/image/269715321

The Academy Awards snubbed the Passion of the Christ, so I will be snubbing the Academy Awards this year.

They could only throw in a couple of token nominations for cinematography, and music.

It should have been nominated for Best Picture, and Best Director. Mell Gibson was robbed.

well, you have made a statement. here's mine in reponse
I wouldn't cross the road to see that film. Gibson has made a sado-masochismic film which apparently has caused an erotic (thoufgh violently denied of course) frisson amongst the fundy community
focussed as it is on A human being undergoing the vilest torures and lovingly dwelling on ...torture actually. And at the same time creating a SCAPEGOAt at the same time. The Jews. so a two way, or threee way nasty affiar is a going down.....a secret craving to see such horrific torture; a self-righteous identification with the dude being tortured; and the group catharsis of being able to name the enemy who is torturing their 'god'....Horrendous

Gibson, the incompetent literalist that he is has no idea the deeper meaning of sacrifice....for which he would have had to research paganism to find out (it means the 'sacrifice' of the egoic boundary that tends to become static and needs encouragement to flow), and has just spread more anti semiticism with his literalist superfical effort. also a complet waste of money too. though fundys are paying to see it in droves. another huge waste of money

a complete sham, in my view

see it at a cinema near YOU!

just jokin heh

I admit that I havent seen the movie but Duendy's post got me wondering......I heard that there is like a 30 minute "torture" seen in the movie but is that anywhere in the Bible?

You Christians are funny. Especially you hallucinating Mormons.

I'm in totally agreement with deundy, and thats a first,the oscars are absolutely right, it's crap it's the worst film gibsons ever done and theres far to much gratuitous violence for a fantasy film.
lord of the rings and harry potter are much better films, and harry potter has'nt got a oscar, so why should a much poorer film.

You Christians are funny. Especially you hallucinating Mormons.

Actually a lot of Mormons would not see it because of it's R rating.

well, you have made a statement. here's mine in reponse
I wouldn't cross the road to see that film.
So, was the cinema on the same side of the road as your home? Your statement indicates that you have not seen the film, that you have no intention of seeing it. Strange that you are able to formulate such a detailed condemnation of the film without having seen it. Such an approach smacks strongly of prejudice, as if you don't require to sit through the work to form a clear impression of all its faults. Well, never let reality interfere with a good raging hatred, eh?
Gibson, the incompetent literalist that he is has no idea the deeper meaning of sacrifice....for which he would have had to research paganism to find out (it means the 'sacrifice' of the egoic boundary that tends to become static and needs encouragement to flow)
Will you be publishing this deep insight into Sacrifice and its Primal Role in Global Religions: What the Pagans Did for Us. You don't think there is the tiniest possibility that other religions than paganism might have an understanding of sacrifice? While you are thinking on that, what is the shallow meaning of sacrifice that Gibson (incompetent literalist ???) has grasped?

Ophi; the movie SUCKED!! Period. and I did see it!.

G.

It was snubbed because it wasn't a movie. It was one man's desire to coerce people to his view through bloody depection of a "scared" act.

The movie had no plot, no real drama besides the ass whipping of Christ, and for those of us who never read a bible and saw the movie, were left confused by many of the things in the movie.

A movie tells a story to neutral audience....no matter who is watching, the story and plot, are alien to the audience and it is the movie's job to entertain you by telling you a tale.

Passion of the Christ wasn't that. Gibson knew who would be watching and he knew what the reaction would be. He bloody (no pun intended) well made sure of that.






Oh wait...that is my reason why I would snub the movie.

Academy snubbed it because it pissed off a lot of Jewish movie moguls (the fact they can be pissed about this is laughable itself) and because it is too conterversial of a movie to award and to handle against other movies in nominations for an award.

Hollywood, promote something contrary to its own agenda? Hell, no! The media isn't recognized as the private enterprise it is.

http://re2.mm-a.yimg.com/image/269715321

The Academy Awards snubbed the Passion of the Christ, so I will be snubbing the Academy Awards this year.

They could only throw in a couple of token nominations for cinematography, and music.

It should have been nominated for Best Picture, and Best Director. Mell Gibson was robbed.'Course Moore's 9/11 got nothing, nada, zero, zip....:D

The Academy Awards snubbed the Passion of the Christ, so I will be snubbing the Academy Awards this year.

They could only throw in a couple of token nominations for cinematography, and music.

It should have been nominated for Best Picture, and Best Director. Mell Gibson was robbed.Not that I care much about the particular circle jerk they call the Academy Awards but out of curiosity just what about the movie do you find deserving of an award?

The plot was abbreviated to the point of being unintelligible (as per sgtlard's comments). The acting was sub-par even for what amounted to a single over-dramatized and drawn out death scene. And it was told with all the compassion and artistic insight of a snuff film.

The only even remotely interesting part of the film is when Judas starts seeing demons.

Mel Gibson's obsession with martyrdom is apparent but at least it can be entertaining when the martyr gets to chop off a few heads with a big fuck-off claymore first.

~Raithere

http://re2.mm-a.yimg.com/image/269715321

The Academy Awards snubbed the Passion of the Christ, so I will be snubbing the Academy Awards this year.

They could only throw in a couple of token nominations for cinematography, and music.

It should have been nominated for Best Picture, and Best Director. Mell Gibson was robbed.
The movie was pure gore. If it got a few nominations for cinematography and music, it didn't deserve those either. Gore aside, it was a crappy movie. Not just painful to watch because of the gore, but because it was such a crappy movie. It was enough to induce me into wanting to rip out my eyes within 10 minutes into it. By 15 minutes I'd turned it off.

So, was the cinema on the same side of the road as your home? Your statement indicates that you have not seen the film, that you have no intention of seeing it. Strange that you are able to formulate such a detailed condemnation of the film without having seen it. Such an approach smacks strongly of prejudice, as if you don't require to sit through the work to form a clear impression of all its faults. Well, never let reality interfere with a good raging hatred, eh?

Will you be publishing this deep insight into Sacrifice and its Primal Role in Global Religions: What the Pagans Did for Us. You don't think there is the tiniest possibility that other religions than paganism might have an understanding of sacrifice? While you are thinking on that, what is the shallow meaning of sacrifice that Gibson (incompetent literalist ???) has grasped?

Ophiolite...you are such a clever sod, i am sure you can answer your own questions yourself.
ME, i have better things to do. when you have something intelligent to say, and with respect, i might make some effort

The movie was supposed to be difficult to watch. It was to show the world a glimps of what Jesus Christ went through for us. He suffered for every one of our sins. I came out of the movie greatfull to him, but also ashamed that I personally caused Christ pain. I myself take a lash at the flesh of Christ every time I sin, and Christ willingly took it and forgives me if I only follow him and repent.

The movie was supposed to be difficult to watch. It was to show the world a glimps of what Jesus Christ went through for us. He suffered for every one of our sins. I came out of the movie greatfull to him, but also ashamed that I personally caused Christ pain. I myself take a lash at the flesh of Christ every time I sin, and Christ willingly took it and forgives me if I only follow him and repent.

D___how sad that you have really bought this fantasy!....look. you are an individual. a unique individual who has jhoy, suffers, has many many emotions, etc. You don't NEd some fantasy character mythic hero from the past to justify your life.
MANY people including kids suffer more than the story-book christ. why are you not crying for them?

Brutus1964: The movie was supposed to be difficult to watch. It was to show the world a glimps of what Jesus Christ went through for us. He suffered for every one of our sins. I came out of the movie greatfull to him, but also ashamed that I personally caused Christ pain. I myself take a lash at the flesh of Christ every time I sin, and Christ willingly took it and forgives me if I only follow him and repent.
*************
M*W: Bullshit!

Ophi; the movie SUCKED!! Period. and I did see it!.

G.
And I value your opinion for precisely that reason. You saw it. You thought it was crap. End of story.
Duendy, on the other hand, apparently did not see the film, but constructs an elaborate put down that is much about his agenda of patriarchal subjugation as it is about the film.
I never saw it. I might watch it out of interest if it ever appears on TV - especially to see if it is as bad as most of you think!

Medicine Woman

You just took a lash at Christ with that statement.

Brutus1964: Medicine Woman

You just took a lash at Christ with that statement.
*************
M*W: So?

Medicine Woman

Where is your compassion!

I liked what Rush Limbaugh said about the Passion snub.

"Mell Gibson don't need no stinking Oscar!"

and the Oscar dont need no stinkin film which glorifies sado-masochism but pretends it doesn't

shit, i HAte hollywood pap conveyor belt profit films meself, but i'd sooner se one of THem than that bloodfest. which gives all them fundys the jollies of righteous indignation

there is probably nuthin worse than a hypocritical christian. doing 'good' for your own good

Medicine Woman

You just took a lash at Christ with that statement.and I'll take another "bullshit"
Medicine Woman

Where is your compassion!it's just a fantasy film, your moron, we will put the "m" back later, when you take your head out of you arse.

Duendy

I agree the movie was difficult to watch but I thought it was important to see. I know many LDS people would not see it because of the R rating. I think that is fine, but I felt I needed to see it anyway. My church does not fixate on Christ's suffering. You will never see a bloodied Christ on a cross in an LDS chapel. We do not really use the cross as a symbol because we worship a living Christ, not a dead one.

Well, I haven't seen this movie so I can't say too much about it. I really have no plans to see it, either. What really pisses me off about this movie though, is that it was not about religion in the long run. Mel knew before he even wrote the movie that people will be lining up for miles to see it. He's knows that religious people are gullible conformists and that they will gobble up anything you feed, especially if it's showing the "humanity of Christ", as he sees it. In the end, this movie is about making money, which is what all Hollywood movies are about. I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is a man writing a movie about what he thinks happened 2000 years ago, that he knows will hit a soft spot in people, and then bragging about it, saying that he is a very religious man and all that bullshit. In reality, this movie is just an overplayed snuff film that would have gone nowhere if 1) it wasn't written by Mel Gibson, and 2) was about a fictional character (well, at least one that is portrayed as fictional).

Well, I haven't seen this movie so I can't say too much about it. I really have no plans to see it, either. What really pisses me off about this movie though, is that it was not about religion in the long run. Mel knew before he even wrote the movie that people will be lining up for miles to see it. He's knows that religious people are gullible conformists and that they will gobble up anything you feed, especially if it's showing the "humanity of Christ", as he sees it. In the end, this movie is about making money, which is what all Hollywood movies are about. I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is a man writing a movie about what he thinks happened 2000 years ago, that he knows will hit a soft spot in people, and then bragging about it, saying that he is a very religious man and all that bullshit. In reality, this movie is just an overplayed snuff film that would have gone nowhere if 1) it wasn't written by Mel Gibson, and 2) was about a fictional character (well, at least one that is portrayed as fictional).

Yea just like all the conformist lemming liberals that ponied up to see Fahrenheit 911?

Yes you mean the film which attempted to communicate to the people what a criminal BushW really is, as is his family

You see Brutus....i have no personal bad feelings about you. like any good Mormon, you tend to be well mannered (though these good manners MAY hide a big SHADOW).......But your defense of Mormonism, and right wong politics really says it all doesn't it?

I am not a lemming liberal, yet i know what the politicians are up to 'left' and 'right' and 'middle'. I have looked at this with a passion, cause i deeply cae for our world--and i mean OUR-insluding all of the bisophere, and all other species, and children, and children to coome, and the poor of the world...etc

Your political naiveity leaves a lot to be desired, and highlights you gullibility regarding your religious fantasies to a T

You've sked me courteously to let you in about more of where i am coming from--ie, about GODDESS. well, politically (though i dont separate politics and spirituality) let me ask you to read Arundhati Roy ...i dont have the exact urls on me righ now but simply type her name + 'The New American Century' and her name with '2005' so you can read some more articles by her. she wil tell you waht is what. MORe than your american biased mass media will tell you

also check out 'Skull and Bones Society
http://home.iae.nl/users/lightnet/world/awaken/skullandbones.htm

here's a quote:
The Skull and Bones fraternity at Yale Univerisity:
President George W.Bush, past president Bush senior, and his father are all three proven initiates of this occult lodge based at a windoless mausoleum -kid you not - The Tomb of the Yale campus. a death cult at the heart of the United States establishment?........[Its] badge is a skull and cross bones with the lodge number 322 below it. Lodge 322 is believed to have been founded on June 28th 1832

also Brutus see
The Rules of Power
www.megspace.com/politics/important/

checkout Sutton's "America's Secret Establishment 'interview with Anthony Sutton

all you have to keep in mind is the MYTHs these fascists are living by. this goes right to the roots of all else i am exploring about. the FEAr of the dark, of the Feminine, of Nature........?

all you have to keep in mind is the MYTHs these fascists are living by.
If you have the time (and if this query meets your standards of respect and intelligence), am I one of these fascists?

Yea just like all the conformist lemming liberals that ponied up to see Fahrenheit 911?

I did see that movie, and it makes me even more angry than The Passion. I don't even want to start on that...fucking Michael Moore, I hate him...

I did see that movie, and it makes me even more angry than The Passion. I don't even want to start on that...fucking Michael Moore, I hate him...

alright ...a powerful statement. But you can't leave it at that, can you? Can you elaborate where this passiona of yours is coming from to help me feel you? WHy do you hate Michael Moore, and that film?

If you have the time (and if this query meets your standards of respect and intelligence), am I one of these fascists?

Now how am i gonna answer this without offending you, alienating you? Yes, there is some feel about some of the things ou say that seem quite commensurate with what i feel is wrong with the way things are

Like for example, one of the first posts i read of yours where you SEEMED to suggest that people in general were much better off because they had certain possessions and so on.
What i am looking at is more than that. i am seeing a manipulation going on that creates a vacuum that then is filled with products...consumerism. This consumerism is eating up the planet. but the people who are running this show dont care, because the main game is profit and expansion. No thought of what is actually happening to the earth, orther species, the whole ecosystems
I am calling this fascism cause that's what it is. 'work will set you free'..they love all that double speak

I saw the film but cannot really report too much on it.

While I am not bothered in the least by gore or violence, I am bothered by bad films. This, while perhaps not as bad as feardotcom or the grudge, certainly ranks as one of the worst films of all time. Let me stress that I have no issue with the main character in the movie being a religious icon, or the movies entire theme based upon assumed historical actions, but just that it really was overwhelmingly boring.

Boring does not = academy award winning films.

Brutus: You need to lay aside your obvious biases.

As a final question: Why was the actor that portrayed jesus... white?

SNAKElord...BRAVO BRAVO BRAVO!! for asking that. that's somethin i'd forgotten to ask meself so....Bravo...i mean jeeezus. he has em speakin in Aramaic ....and pseudo detail etc and has /jesus WHITE....?

Aborted_Fetus: I did see that movie, and it makes me even more angry than The Passion. I don't even want to start on that...fucking Michael Moore, I hate him...
*************
M*W: I totally agree. He riled up the actors against Bush, then they all had to go public with their anti-Bush propaganda. I'm still waiting for the likes of Streisand, Baldwin, Pitt, et al. to move to Europe. So much for Michael Mooreon. He didn't have the influence he thought he had.

gods hair is white as snow and his legs are bronze this movie sucked

F911 and The Passion were both important movies, but not the best ones. If they got people more interested in the subjects, if only to refute them, then they served their purpose. Important subject matter doesn't give them a free pass.

The movie was supposed to be difficult to watch. It was to show the world a glimps of what Jesus Christ went through for us. He suffered for every one of our sins. I came out of the movie greatfull to him, but also ashamed that I personally caused Christ pain. I myself take a lash at the flesh of Christ every time I sin, and Christ willingly took it and forgives me if I only follow him and repent.

Comedic gold. Thank you.
:D

Brutus, I want to ask ya something, so I can clear up any suspicions and preconceptions I may have.

Did you want The Passion of the Christ to win an award because you thought it was a prime example of cinematography, direction, cast, etc.? Or did you want it to win an award because the main character was your Lord and Savior? Or is it a combination of both?

Brutus, I want to ask ya something, so I can clear up any suspicions and preconceptions I may have.

Did you want The Passion of the Christ to win an award because you thought it was a prime example of cinematography, direction, cast, etc.? Or did you want it to win an award because the main character was your Lord and Savior? Or is it a combination of both?

Athelwulf

I think it should have been at least nominated on its own merits. I thought it was beautifully filmed and acted. I do believe it was snubbed because of the controversy surrounding it. I think the complaints of it being anti-Semitic were unfounded. I would say the critics were using the film to attack the New Testament itself.

As a final question: Why was the actor that portrayed jesus... white?
LOL! Because Christians view Jesus as a blue eyed, blond haired, golden boy. Look at ANY image of Christ put out by the Church and the image portrays a man with light brown to blond hair, blue eyes and just a slight golden tan.

That was one of the first things that stood out in that movie. The fact that if Jesus did in fact exist would mean that he would have been dark probably frightens the Church. One can't have a darkie as a son of God now can we? ;)

I think it should have been at least nominated on its own merits.

As do I.

I thought it was beautifully filmed and acted.

I can agree with that.

I do believe it was snubbed because of the controversy surrounding it. I think the complaints of it being anti-Semitic were unfounded.

I don't see how it could be anti-Semitic.

Thanks for answering my question. It helped clear up some stuff in my head. :)