the Passion.....

whether you believe in God or not, this is a very moving film, if for no other reason, than to re-evaluate your take on mankind.....from a purely cinematic viewpoint, it very good, imho....it portrays the final 12 hours of Christ's life, and definately embosses your mind with the level of cruelty in the human heart, and the ability to perpetrate that cruelty to your fellow man....on a human level, i was seriously moved...on a spiritual level, you cant help but contemplate the reality of life as we know it.....this assumes you have a heart to begin with..... :wink:

Doc Brass...

ps..i am not trying to instigate anything here, i just felt the urge to share a thought or two......

I don't think I'm going to waste my money watching JC get crucified on the big screen.

I do plan to see it, not sure when it's out in the UK though. Or is it already...?

I hate Mel Gibson, so sadly won't be able to watch this without being biased against it (although I hear it's not really that Christian so that's okay...)

A lot of people seem to not like Mel Gibson... I don't see what he did that was so awful?

I blame that god awful excuse for a scottish accent in Braveheart.

If I'm right I think Mel Gibson and his family are actually part of a serious cult which claim jews are meddling fools..... well Mels father said alot of contriversial stuff to the media about jews....

I dont know why people dont like mel gibson I like quite alot of his films especially the Leathal Weapon series and Mad Max 2 but I didn't like Braveheart or Patriot that much.

I liked the battle seanes in Patriot especially when the cannon ball hit that bloke in the head but apart from that it was pretty boring and Braveheart well that was just crap especially the crap accent he did it didnt sound that scottish.

But as for the film about jesus I won't begoing to the cinema to see it not that I think it looks s**t cos from what I've seen it looks alright I just dont go to the cinema unless I really want to see the film.

I'll either wait for it to come on DVD or I'll aquire it in a few months.

There is one group of christians that got a license to show it at 3 venues around the US and they are (or were) planing on using it as a pice of propaganda for recruting perposes like they did with the last film about jesus.

i have no real interest in this movie, but have been a big fan of Mr. Gibson since his mad max days..

i doubt he has any ulterior motives for this movie, no more so than many gay stars are out to promote gay-isms..

professionalism precludes most attempts at a "statement"

ask Elton John how well he faired with Disney when he "came out" and insisted he be allowed to.. :rolleyes:

Disney s**t canned him faster than .... well he is no longer associated with any Disney movies..

shoulda kept his mouth shut..

if Gibson has a motive, i doubt its anything religious.

It's a good film, and I think even non christians would agree with me.

The strongest message I recieved was, as Brasso says, the level to which human cruelty can go. regaurdless of weather you believe in Jesus, the things they show being done to him were standard forms of punishment in that time. The thought that ran through my head throughout was "how could you do that?" how could you bring yourself to accept such brutality as part of your job and society?

As to the rampant claims in the media of antisemetism, I think that's hogwash. Jesus was a jew, his followers were jews. It's completly irrational to caste the situation as antisemetic. If Jesus and his followers had been portrayed unrealisticaly as caucasian, then there would be a valid point, but the film was quite biblicaly accurate.

Ah, Mel Gibson. Every time he releases an action-adventure or drama I am reminded of the Simpsons episode where he remakes Mr. Smith goes to Washington and changes the last scene into a overly violent action sequence with such brilliant scenes as impaling a senator with the American flag and cutting off the President's head with the Senate seal. That basically summarizes all the movies I've ever seen him in.

Ebert called this the most violent movie he's ever seen. Gibson likes violence and God bless him for it.

And Myrk-, that's just his father. You know, old people and their strange beliefs and prejudices...

Did it have the suiside squad?

sorry I just started thinking about the Life of Brian where he's being crusifyed and a guard comes and askes who's Brian and every one but Brian says there Brian I love the bloke that says "I'm Brian and so is my wife".

I carnt beleve that that film was banned for 20 years for being anti-christian.

I got noth'n against mel. I do not like the Passion. I found it very shallow. I left at the part when they are beating him with whips which have razer blades attached to the ends. First of all anyone who has never heard of JC would learn nothing about the purpose of his life as christ. The movie showed none of gods teachings. And 2 hours and 30 minutes of a man being tortured is repulsive to me, and is not movie content. The movie is graphic to say the least. This movie doesn't set JC apart from others of the time because many others were also crusified. If it is a measure of suffering many people have been tortured worse.

Dr Brasso said:
this assumes you have a heart to begin with.....

Well, that ruins my plans.

And, Mr. WhiteLegion, I don't think if you were getting your ass whipped with razor edge whips and nailed on a cross that you would give too much thought to the fact that crucifiction was a common practice (which I don't believe it was until Spartacus' slave revolt), much less that it was unfair to focus on your own suffering because others had been given worse treatment.

Had the movie explored into any of God's teachings, people would be having a much larger hissy fit about the whole thing, but that was not its end - the movie was made to show you exactly what happened to Jesus to inspire respect for the belief that he died for us.

My argument stands

assuming the whole Jesus thing even occurred, i think a graphic depiction is in order, or at the very least, past due for one..

hell we have much more recent atrocities, that have been authenticated, and documented with video.. (i refer to the Holocaust movies such as shindlers list and/or the very REAL atrocities the american cavalry did to our native americans )

personally i doubt almost anything written as long ago as the bible for anything resembling authenticity, but considering so many DO believe its accurate enuff to read, i see no real issue with watching it in video form.

remember, i have not seen the movie, i am only commenting on what people seem to be saying.. i am not trying to start another Theo-war :rolleyes: just voicing my concerns and/or thoughts.

tbh orph, i dont think there is much actual doubt as to whether jesus existed, its more how you interpret his role in society at the time..

perhaps a particuarly gifted doctor/healer type, judged by the authorities to be an attack on their power - thus you have the crucifiction and whatnot..

ive not seen the movie but i'd like to, more out of curiosity than anything else, to see how Gibson fairs in his role as "director".

my theory sir gwil.. any society that depicts jesus as a caucasian, deserves my scorn at best, and my outright .. well i have no faith in a people who cannot even get the race illustrated correctly :/

as to the guy "jesus" , i have no doubt he lived, but i also contend his life... was just as boring as the next sheep herder of the time..

jesus is larger than life, because it has been "told' that way, not because of anything that occurred..

Orpheus said:
my theory sir gwil.. any society that depicts jesus as a caucasian, deserves my scorn at best, and my outright .. well i have no faith in a people who cannot even get the race illustrated correctly :/

Uh, Orph... Caucasian got its name from the Caucasus Mountains where Georgia, Armenia, part of Russia, and other countries now reside. Caucasian languages were spoken in Turkey and Syria. Caucasians come from the area that divides Europe and Asia, and if the term is applied liberally it's not a far stretch at all to call the people who live in the Middle East caucasian.

Anyways, what 'race' would the people who live in ancient Israel be anyways?

choosing to dissect my wording yakman :smile:

the race would definitely not be of the image we commonly see throughout the american churches thats for sure..

fair hair, light skin, essentially american white people.

now you could also dissect, my description or american white too.. but i think you grasp the gist of my comment, even if i illustrated it poorly..

america has "whitened" our rendition of the jesus we know today.

pictures of jesus, may look more authentic in other places, or countries, but i find it difficult to imagine the "jesus christ superstar" image coming from the location of Israel, or wherever his origin..

That's better :razz:

Orpheus said:
my theory sir gwil.. any society that depicts jesus as a caucasian, deserves my scorn at best, and my outright .. well i have no faith in a people who cannot even get the race illustrated correctly :/

I don't quite know about that, Orph. Religion and morality are subjective, they exist only when people can identify with and apply their ethics to their own lives. If you've ever seen Chinese Christian art, the Chinese style is very apparent, but why does that degrade it? If Jesus is white, and the majority of our country is white, then so be it, if it needs be changed then it will change.

"My argument stands"

Then I don't believe I understood your argument correctly.

whiteLegion said:
My argument stands

No, your argument misses the point. The movie was a classic passion play a very old tradition of acting out Jesus's last hours. it was not suposed to be the story of his life, or in any way a presentation of the doctrine he tought.

Tracer Bullet said:

whiteLegion said:
My argument stands

No, your argument misses the point. The movie was a classic passion play a very old tradition of acting out Jesus's last hours. it was not suposed to be the story of his life, or in any way a presentation of the doctrine he tought.

? posted by Cassius

"My argument stands"

Then I don't believe I understood your argument correctly.

WL: My "argument" was that the movie is shallow. It is shallow because it ignores the doctrine he tought. The movie being shallow is just my opinion, and I already said why in my first post. But to repeat what I said before, 2.5 hours of a man being tortured does not make for good cinema (my opinion, anyone who disagrees say otherwhise) or set jc from other martyrs in history.

Cassius said:

Dr Brasso said:
this assumes you have a heart to begin with.....

Well, that ruins my plans.

And, Mr. WhiteLegion, I don't think if you were getting your ass whipped with razor edge whips and nailed on a cross that you would give too much thought to the fact that crucifiction was a common practice (which I don't believe it was until Spartacus' slave revolt), much less that it was unfair to focus on your own suffering because others had been given worse treatment.

Had the movie explored into any of God's teachings, people would be having a much larger hissy fit about the whole thing, but that was not its end - the movie was made to show you exactly what happened to Jesus to inspire respect for the belief that he died for us.

WL: I don't know anything about the "Spartacus' slave revolt", but that still does not cahnge the truth that people where crucified before jc. And people since have suffered just as much if not more. (As far as bodily suffering is concerned). And seeing how jc died does not "inspire" people to believe in his cause. If that were the case the peoples "belief in jc" would be weak. JC strength lies in his relationship with god not the severity of his crucifiction....

Legion, you mind getting rid of that URL underneath your name? It's screwing with the board in a fugly way.

As to the whole White Jesus thing, he was of Jewish descent; Jews of today would be a good enough model to go by for what he may have looked like considering their tenacity for marrying other Jews through the years. And he's not that far off, it's not like he's blatantly Irish or something...

Alien_Sniper said:
I don't think I'm going to waste my money watching JC get crucified on the big screen.

I agree with AS on this one, i go to a catholic skool so if i wanna c big J get killled ill go to the chapel.....

Did it have the suiside squad?

sorry I just started thinking about the Life of Brian where he's being crusifyed and a guard comes and askes who's Brian and every one but Brian says there Brian I love the bloke that says "I'm Brian and so is my wife".

I carnt beleve that that film was banned for 20 years for being anti-christian.

Banned? I don't recall it being banned anywhere. Even though the critisicms from the church was unprecedented, it was never actually banned as far as I know. Where do you live? Maybe it was an isolated banning. And how people can call it anti-christian, when Jesus is actually treated with a large amount of respect, is beyond me.

I never liked Mel Gibson(except in "what women want"), but I think I'll start to like him after that movie. There's a lot of anti-christian details in movies nowadays... Everywhere there's a naked woman with a cross on her neck, or a rotten priest, or a virgin marie statue who just "happens to be" in the background, in a house for prostitutes (cf. Artificial Intelligence), or a rabbin who wins the chick against a priest (i forgot the name of the movie)...

So it's nice to see some christian-friendly movie from time to time...

Cassius said:

Orpheus said:
my theory sir gwil.. any society that depicts jesus as a caucasian, deserves my scorn at best, and my outright .. well i have no faith in a people who cannot even get the race illustrated correctly :/

I don't quite know about that, Orph. Religion and morality are subjective, they exist only when people can identify with and apply their ethics to their own lives. If you've ever seen Chinese Christian art, the Chinese style is very apparent, but why does that degrade it? If Jesus is white, and the majority of our country is white, then so be it, if it needs be changed then it will change.

"My argument stands"

Then I don't believe I understood your argument correctly.

i know i am going to type this one way but mean it a totally different one so bare with me cass..

what i find distasteful is people "praise" jesus everyday, but also are some of the same people who say crap like "jews are the scourge of the earth" or some other derogatory comment..

if jesus, was indeed jewish, then he needs to have his portrait represented correctly, to have any meaning at all.

cultures who alter the image are not only s**tting on the poor guy, but allowing their own personal biases to influence how they "view" jesus.

when america "whitened" him to our race, and cash i didn't say "lightened" him, i mean white, as in the jesus christ superstar image, it really IMO slapped him (jesus) in the face.

it would be like, 2000 years from now, martin luther king jr. was portrayed as white, or jewish, or maybe even (if we have left earth) some other race entirely..

i am not putting MLK in the same class as JC, but i think you understand my drift.

america (and i assume other countries) are seriously biased, and racist at heart, especially if they think JC looked anything like his portraits of today.

anyways, i hope that came out fairly coherent. :smile:

Jews today are different to Jews back then- many of them are secular and don't actually have a religion, while the rest "believe in the teachings in the Old Testament" (I think that's right?) and don't believe Jesus is the son of god or whatever. It's more about the lifestyle now.

It's quite funny actually and just goes to show how people know f**k all about anything (and yet think they're clever enough to be able to objectively look at the bible and become Christian or not?! Ha!). Of course Jews were 'responsible' for his death- if not the people in general, then some elders- but surely the fact that he died is a good thing, the best thing that could happen to us, according to christians.

According to Christians though. As an atheist, I find it absurd- if Jesus is the son of god/god himself, then crucifying him isn't going to be a big deal at all, and if you think of the larger picture it's not at all logical/sane. If Jesus was sent down to die for us, he would have known, and perhaps God, forseeing the hatred towards Jews, would have done things a bit differently...

Jesus was a real person, perhaps not the son of God, but he was indeed crucified, which is a rather gruesome punishment, especially for a man who (as far as we know) did absolutely nothing to deserve it. If anyone wants to depict that suffering out of respect and belief in that man as a diety, I don't find anything wrong with it. If that suffering was too intense to watch or you don't respect the beliefs or opinions in the movie, save your eight bucks and stay at home.

I wouldn't take this kind of stance with most things, but since it is a movie, especially one where it was made to sell to only one audience, it warrants that defense.

fundamentally, i concur with master cassius..

there are 10's of 1000's of movies, don't watch the ones you find offencive..

sounds like pretty good advice to me.

Half too 99.9% of the movies that holywood releases are crap anyway. I think the only film that I've liked that came from holywood in the last 12months was part 3 of the LOTR trilogy, and last month I saw 'Big Fish' which was a total pile of rubbish.

Kain, the last movie you are referring to is "Keeping the Faith" with Ben Stiller and Ed Norton. Personally, I thought that was one of the smarter and least offensive movies made in the past decade that has a priest in a lead role. Of course, it was more ecumenical than orthodox, so I could see how the hard-liners wouldn't like it.

Cassius said:
Jesus was a real person, perhaps not the son of God, but he was indeed crucified, which is a rather gruesome punishment, especially for a man who (as far as we know) did absolutely nothing to deserve it.

I like the way you take this to be given, when it's questionable at best. Are you basing this off Josephus (or here)? His account can't be taken as 'fact' :rolleyes: The only strong leg you have to stand on is the fact that there is a bible/church which have been around for so long, in which case I'd refer you to the hundreds of other religions/texts in the world and ask you to explain the difference.

God and Gaming don't mix if you ask me.

this is NOT the discussion i wanted to invoke gents *sigh.....but this being the snarkpit, i should have known better....

Doc B.....

Let's all talk about what Brasso wants!

mumbles

selfish git

:biggrin:

Jesus pwns

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/Central/02/26/passion.death.reut/index.html

Leprous denying the existence of a "Jesus" is possibly defending your beliefs a little too vehemently... - there is good historical evidence to support his life - the only thing in doubt is what he was/did.

I myself absolutely disbelieve pretty much everything laid out by the Bible, and think it is no longer a good moral base, more a tool for an elite few to abuse and exercise on people for their own ends, but you have to accept that people have beliefs and they deserve to be respected :smile: I thought a real class A university student would be the first to acknowledge this.. :wink:

Either way thats not what the threads about and we're more or less covering old ground - and its old ground situated in a no mans land of debate. Religion is a sensitive topic, and due to its personal nature of belief/disbelief and what it means to each invididual person, i'm afraid youre never going to be able to shift peoples opinions dramatically. Besides, pursuing an anti-Christian line and trying to rubbish something is simply "indoctrination" on the flipside, as it were..

Gwil said:
Leprous denying the existence of a "Jesus" is possibly defending your beliefs a little too vehemently... - there is good historical evidence to support his life - the only thing in doubt is what he was/did.

No, there isn't actually, as I've been discovering over the last few days :razz:

Where did you read that?

What is exactly a "hard-liner" Cash ?

Someone who is uncompromising