The Passion of Christ

[Admin]

The Passion of Christ (A Mel Gibson Film) is getting a lot of interest in all media. You probably saw the trailer on your last visit at the cinema or online or on the television.

Anyone plan on watching the film?
I wonder if The Passion of Christ will break the all-time sales record, passing "The Titanic." I guess not. Nothing can beat The Titanic.

[Puffguts]

I will probably rent it once released on video or dvd. In my opinion the film would be very bland as it mainly focus on the suffering of Christ and "the terrible betrayal of the Jewish population" that released Christ to the Roman jurisdiction. There is no heroic tales to be told, only a two hour long suffering that might try stir up people's anger on the people "who really killed Jesus Christ."

I would like to bring comparison between this film and The Schindler's List. It is true that the Schindler's List wasn't entirely accurate to the historical facts, namely that Jews were not the only victims of the Nazi genocide and the Warsaw ghetto (the majority of the death camp victims were the Jews, next the slavs, and large numbers of Russian POWs since most of those death camps were in Poland), and that is the reason I am not against any historical accuracy of "Passion". The difference is at the portrayal of the Germans, the "oppressor" position is played with a human face. The Nazi stormtroopers were not all cold blooded killers, some of the Nazi Reich officers were not comfortable with the murders, and even the chief villan of the movie (and an villan no less, if not more in real life), Commandant Goeth, was portrayed as a real human being. He has his own secrets, his own feelings, and ultimatly, his very own and believable motives. There is no true villan and no true savior in the Schindler's List. There are only real characters with believable stories, no matter however heroic, courageous, twisted or repulsive they are.

Yet in "Passion", the entire Jewish population is branded together with a single face - a face of calculated cruelty, ignorance and betrayal. Schindler's List specificly focused on the diversity of the German occupation force, the Jewish policemen under Nazi control, and the diverse reaction and decisions made by the Jewish people. There is none of that in "Passion" but a unified, inhuman cruel population that was solely responsible on the death of Christ.

The pseudo-historic films should make as little generalization as possible.

[Admin]

Originally Posted by Puffguts

I would like to bring comparison between this film and The Schindler's List. It is true that the Schindler's List wasn't entirely accurate to the historical facts, namely that Jews were not the only victims of the Nazi genocide and the Warsaw ghetto (the majority of the death camp victims were the Jews, next the slavs, and large numbers of Russian POWs since most of those death camps were in Poland), and that is the reason I am not against any historical accuracy of "Passion". The difference is at the portrayal of the Germans, the "oppressor" position is played with a human face. The Nazi stormtroopers were not all cold blooded killers, some of the Nazi Reich officers were not comfortable with the murders, and even the chief villan of the movie (and an villan no less, if not more in real life), Commandant Goeth, was portrayed as a real human being. He has his own secrets, his own feelings, and ultimatly, his very own and believable motives. There is no true villan and no true savior in the Schindler's List. There are only real characters with believable stories, no matter however heroic, courageous, twisted or repulsive they are.

Great comparison with Schinder's List (great movie and love the black/white mode).
The producers of the film has a goal to achieve with the film.
The Passion of Christ may or may not touch on all historical facts according to the bible but the film will touch a great section of Christ's life. I didn't get a chance to watch any interview of Mel Gibson to hear what his motivation was. But I'm positive that Mel Gibson and the rest of the production crew would want to inform millions, if not billions of people worldwide of who Jesus Christ is and what Jesus Christ has done for all the people.

Hope the film will be effective and show a great deal of Jesus Christ. But if you really want to watch a film that will touch your heart, go watch "The Jesus Film." The Jesus Film in 1978 Primarily funded by an independent businessman and a long-time friend of Campus Crusade, the Jesus Film began as a six million dollar production. Since then it has become the most widely translated film of all time, and used by more than 1,500 Christian agencies to reach over five billion peopld around the world. Because this film has been translated into more than seven hundred and fifty different languages, a vast majority of people have heard the story of Jesus in their native language.

We all can expect positives and negatives criticism once the release of the film. And as usual, religious film will attract much more critics from various religious groups around the world. But hopefully, the film is not only for criticism/evaluation but an opportunity to convert non-believers to christianity.

I'm glad to see that the language spoken in the film is in its native language (with subscript) and not in english. Phew.
Churches and christian organizations are working on promotion ideas to aid and boost the sales for the first week of its opening, I'm excited to know that my church leased one of the theatres in Anaheim just for our college group.

[Keng]

Agnostic so no no

[Puffguts]

The Jesus Film sounds very interesting to watch. But I do like the fact that Passion used Latin as their language. I wonder how accurate their are with the Latin pronunciation, but only the Pope or Ivy League academcians can really tell, since Latin isn't really being taught anywhere else.

[Admin]

Originally Posted by Keng

Agnostic so no no

No problem with that.
Was Latin the language spoken during that period, according to the bible?

[Keng]

I thought they were supposed to speak shershernian!

[Puffguts]

I believe one form of Latin was the official language during that period, since Latin was the Roman Empire's official language. For almost 400 years, Christianity was illegal under Roman law until Emperor Constantine came to power at around 324AD, which he provided compensation for the people who had been oppressed for their Christian beliefs, and he gave Christianity the position of official religion in the empire, and henceforth, the official religion of pretty much the entire continent west of today's Turkey - the eastmost frontier of the Byzantine east Roman Empire. The Pope speaks Latin and it was a tradition started with the Roman Empire, that made me think Latin was their language around the time of Passion.

[Puffguts]

Oops! Looks like the language which Christ spoke was Aramaic. CNN has the story here: http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science....ap/index.html

[Trader]

I just saw the trailer!! Very graphic intensive. Take some napkins with you if you're planning on watching it.

[Puffguts]

I just watched the trailer from apple's movie preview page as well. The film has a Gladiatoristic feel to it.

[Admin]

Originally Posted by Puffguts

I just watched the trailer from apple's movie preview page as well. The film has a "Gladiatoristic" feel to it.

LOL. Yeah, it does.
I'm planning on watching the film tomorrow night and I'll post a brief write-up (with a spoiler tag).

[MandyMindy]

The Jesus Film was a movie like none others. Isn't the film opening on the 25th, Wednesday?

[Admin]

The Passion of the Christ is one graphic-intense movie yet very powerful.
You won't imagine how much Jesus Christ is tortured throughout the movie. Never-ending strikes after strike. There are CGs involved in some section of the movie (not overdone). Few surprise scenes with the devils.


Two scenes that gave me watery eyes.
The graphic was unbearable...blood and constant lashing.

[Keng]

The music of Christ beeng tourtued!! ohhh the horror!

[lost-and-found]

I saw it twice already, and I'd really like to see it again. As far as branding the whole Jewish population as guilty for the crucifiction of Christ, that's the biggest bunch of BS I've heard in a long time. The movie even shows several scenes in which several pharisees lash out against the condemning high priest by telling him that the trial is not fair, they get kicked out. Also, look how much the Roman soldiers torture Jesus, they might not have brought him to the trial but they sure put Him through HELL,

[Admin]

Gibson insists he's just giving us a literal retelling of the Gospels, said Susan Thistlethwaite in the Chicago Tribune, but that's a convenient cop-out. Gibson was free to choose among the Gospels' differing versions of Christ's life and death. Strangely, he's given us Jesus as he'd appear in Gibson's Braveheart film-a bloody "action hero" who can take all the punishment his evil enemies dish out. Where are Jesus' teachings on love? Where is his ministry to the sick and the poor? I have no doubt that Gibson's Christian fervor is sincere, said Kenneth Turan in the Los Angeles Times. But his version of Christianity is angry, divisive, and "profoundly disheartening." It will pit his fellow true believers against everyone else. Watch: Every debate over this film will end with each side muttering, "You just don't get it."


That's true--you just don't get it, said Ramesh Ponmuru in National Review. Gibson did not make this film to convert secular disbelievers. Indeed, "the movie may make Christianity seem more, rather than less, alien and strange." The Passion is for those of us who already believe, and who want to feel our faith even more deeply. The film's central message is that "we all are guilty for the Crucifixion," and Christ's terrible sacrifice. Source= WEEK



There will always be critics/viewers who will go against the film and those who will praise the film. In the end, what matters is that such film had been produced for all interested viewers to go watch.

[lost-and-found]

great quotes Kaycee. And to answer that first accusation by that first review in your post I have to say he still teaches love while he's being crucified. It's just impossible to do it the same way as he did when he was free while he was being crucified. He himself said taht "there is no greater love than to give up one's life for friends." or something to that effect (I'm too busy writing my econ essay to grab the bible and find the quote ).

Anyways, as I said, I really do not believe this movie to be anti-semitic and to me it is the truest depiction of Jesus' suffering. Of course there will always be bigots who will use this movie as an excuse to commit racial crimes, but as Michael Medved (who is a Jew btw) said in his great analysis of The Passion: "should we stop eating pasta?" because Pilate (a Roman) let Jesus be curcified. See the full analysis of it by Medved...who's radio show can be heard on AM 870 from 12-3PM M-F

http://www.christianitytoday.com/mov...prejudice.html

[Admin]

Everybody knows (or should know) that the Jewish community has great power in the United States and in no way, would Mel Gibson and the producers think of creating a slight idea of anti-Semiticism in the film.

Anyways....what happened to the rooster during Peter's denial?
And any significance on the baby that the satan had on his back?

[lost-and-found]

Here's my view on the baby: Gibson said many times that the reason for the woman playing the satan figure was to show that evil hides in pretty things and disguises itself as good. So, too, the baby from the back looks very pretty, but then we see the real face of the figure and we see that it is really a monster, so I think Gibson further showed his point that way.

As for the rooster, I don't know, i didn't notice it the first time, but when I watched it the second time I was wondering where it went too...I guess it got completely swallowed in the noise of the crowd.