The Passion
- Thread starter apendrapew
- Start date
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
I heard Mel's next movie will be The Flaying and Disembowelment of Tlauizcalpantecutli
jesus spoke aramaic, not hebrew
the roman aristocrats would have spoken greek as a second language. not a terribly important detail for this film.
the roman aristocrats would have spoken greek as a second language. not a terribly important detail for this film.
Firstoff, the movie isn't anti-semitic, unless you call being true to the "historical" record of the gospels anti-semitic. The passage in Matthew where the Jewish rabble answers to Pilate (reluctant to kill Jesus) that "his blood be on us, and on our children" isn't in the film, where it could easily have been.
For the record, Hitler himself wasn't the biggest fan of Jesus:
"Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure."
Nor is it sadomasochistic - there's not a hint of eroticism in the torture scenes (then again, I had my eyes closed during the scourging, what a pussy). This is a cheaper shot than the expected "anti-semitism" claims. No human being could enjoy the way Gibson treats it.
Granted, it's graphic and brutal as hell (and you do wonder about Gibson) - but so were most methods of punishment in history. You walk out of the film wondering if the price we paid for those amazing Roman aquaducts was this monstrosity.
It is strangely self-aggrandizing. What sort of man produces a movie just to play Jesus? Gibson has a major complex there. He also seems to really, really despise the human race. The ugliness of human beings is captured perfectly. Interestingly, he doesn't really develop Jesus as a character - he spends more time with Pilate. Which I liked - Pilate has always been the most sympathetic character in the Bible for me.
SwedishFish:
I, too, was struck by the historical inaccuracies but you can't blame Gibson for all of them - the gospels contradict each other. Which I found interesting - Gibson has Judas hang himself, as the Gospel of Matthew suggests. Acts, however, claims that he purchased a plot of land (medieval tradition has it a potter's field) with his 30 shekels and rather, er, exploded in the middle of it.
They do. In the Gospels, they resist and one Roman soldier has his ear cut off. Jesus heals his ear and goes with the soldiers.
The serpant thing was interesting.
What I found interesting was also that Gibson adheres to the error of having Jesus crucified spikes through hands. You can't crucify a person spikes through hands, you crucify them spikes through wrists. Or, it is more likely that the Romans would simply bind them to the cross. Whatever way, it's more merciful to crucify spikes through wrists - the blood loss would have hastened death, instead of leaving the victim to die of asphyxiation.
As for the wording of the sign, it all depends on which gospel you choose to adhere to.
For the record, Hitler himself wasn't the biggest fan of Jesus:
"Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure."
Nor is it sadomasochistic - there's not a hint of eroticism in the torture scenes (then again, I had my eyes closed during the scourging, what a pussy). This is a cheaper shot than the expected "anti-semitism" claims. No human being could enjoy the way Gibson treats it.
Granted, it's graphic and brutal as hell (and you do wonder about Gibson) - but so were most methods of punishment in history. You walk out of the film wondering if the price we paid for those amazing Roman aquaducts was this monstrosity.
It is strangely self-aggrandizing. What sort of man produces a movie just to play Jesus? Gibson has a major complex there. He also seems to really, really despise the human race. The ugliness of human beings is captured perfectly. Interestingly, he doesn't really develop Jesus as a character - he spends more time with Pilate. Which I liked - Pilate has always been the most sympathetic character in the Bible for me.
SwedishFish:
I, too, was struck by the historical inaccuracies but you can't blame Gibson for all of them - the gospels contradict each other. Which I found interesting - Gibson has Judas hang himself, as the Gospel of Matthew suggests. Acts, however, claims that he purchased a plot of land (medieval tradition has it a potter's field) with his 30 shekels and rather, er, exploded in the middle of it.
They do. In the Gospels, they resist and one Roman soldier has his ear cut off. Jesus heals his ear and goes with the soldiers.
The serpant thing was interesting.
What I found interesting was also that Gibson adheres to the error of having Jesus crucified spikes through hands. You can't crucify a person spikes through hands, you crucify them spikes through wrists. Or, it is more likely that the Romans would simply bind them to the cross. Whatever way, it's more merciful to crucify spikes through wrists - the blood loss would have hastened death, instead of leaving the victim to die of asphyxiation.
As for the wording of the sign, it all depends on which gospel you choose to adhere to.
outlandish said:
"That's just your opinion" ... very clever, jackass.
You definitely do not believe the crap that you're typing. There's just no way.
my friends and his family went to see it. He told me that they had to stop it in the middle for about 2 minutes, beacuse the people were crying for some reason.
If you're conflicted over this film, visit www.sharethepassionofthechrist.com, peruse the gifts section, buy yourself an official Passion keyring and mug, then, after you realize how fucked up that is, maybe the truth will come to you: it's just a movie.
Josh
It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks :m:
Josh
It's just a ride. - Bill Hicks :m:
Xev said:
i think this is where the trouble comes from. not just which gospel but also which version. i've lost counts of how many versions of the bible there are.
me pa is a biblical scholar (been at it way longer than me) so i'm anxious for him to see it but i don't know if it would be a good idea with his failing heart. if he does, i'll post his take on it.
I left the theatre wondering what the point of the movie was. Of course Jesus suffered. He had to die a martyr or noone would believe him. But he didn't suffer any more than anyone else that was crucified (contrary to what Gibson shows). Latin and Aramaic were correct as far as I know, but I don't think they would be used interchangeably. I don't think that most people would understand and speak both. As for the historical inaccuracies...well...since when did historical accuracy and the bible go hand in hand. Discounting the gospels, all that's really known about Jesus is that he was crucified in around 30 CE.
I think I may have a point in there somewhere. Or right, I don't understand why it was made.
And Nebula, if you boycott the movie, I will have to ome down their and kick your arse.
I think I may have a point in there somewhere. Or right, I don't understand why it was made.
And Nebula, if you boycott the movie, I will have to ome down their and kick your arse.
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
Yes, I do.
I read that the actor that played Jesus took a hell of a beating in the process of making the movie. One of the dudes accidentally lashed him in the leg a few times and opened him right up. And while they were shooting the scene with him already crucified, apparently he was struck by lightning! How sweet is that? But not as ominous as it seems. He was on a hill raised up 12 feet in the air and it had to be stormy for them to shoot the scene with the right effect.
spidergoat, the concept of anti semitism or "self hate" was propegated and started by the founders of the zionist movement.
A/S is the most overused and least understood concept used on this board (well appart from terrorism/terrorist etc)
do yourself a favour and read this:
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/
A/S is the most overused and least understood concept used on this board (well appart from terrorism/terrorist etc)
do yourself a favour and read this:
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/
Last edited by a moderator:
spidergoat
Valued Senior Member
Interesting reading on that website, not only what they say about jews, but the formation of christianity as well. I wonder how reliable it is, or if it is biased towards socialism.