Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,916 Year: 4,173/9,624 Month: 1,044/974 Week: 3/368 Day: 3/11 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Passion Of The Christ
Eastern Star
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 71 (89004)
02-27-2004 7:32 AM


I saw the movie
I was really looking forward to this film. But I have to say it was an utter disappointment. I walked away thinking I was clipped of 9 bucks and two hours of my time. I didn't see anything anti-semitic about the movie. What I saw was a very conservative view of the Passion brought to the screen. And that is fine. It just isn't my interpretation. The movie bored me more than moved me. If this film moves a person in such a way that it strengthens their spirit, then great. Faith is wonderful in that way because we all have our ways of accepting the Lords word in our heart. But for me this movie was wildly overdone/interpreted.
I read an earlier post that the movie doesn't do any historical or factual justice to the story and someone else replied that you can't do that to this movie. Being someone who mixes both faith and a scholarly approach to Christianity, I'd say you are both right and wrong. What has been done wrong (to me) is that Mel still thinks of Mary of Magdalene as a prostitute. He doesn't say it so much as he insinuates it in the movie and it's hard to miss. From a scholarly approach; The Gospel of John is considered the most myth driven of the four gospels. In the early church, it was a book that was rejected as heresy by some circles. The book didn't gain real importance until around the middle of the second century when Christians were really beginning to seperate themselves as a different entity, rather than as a Jewish faction. That said, this movie is really Mel's interpretation of the Gospel of John and then some. To me, it seems, the other three books mean little to nothing to Mel Gibson.
AS for acting - there are bits here that are so overdone its laughable. The Roman soldiers who take delight in scourging Jesus is an example of bad acting that should be shown to actors on how NOT to act.
The first hour of the movie has little to no violence in it. The second hour is just a constant beating to the point of being pornographic. But I have to say, the beatings weren't as graphic as I thought it was going to be, it's just that it rarely stops. Jesus' body is so torn that it can be hard to look at if you have a weak stomach.
AS for the anti-semitism. I didn't see it. Plenty of people call for Jesus to be saved and spared. Yes there is a mob mentality that is portrayed but I think that is how it was set up. I also didn't see any Jews taking delight in the beatings. If anyone took delight, it was the Romans. Pilate may be portrayed as weak but it doesn't mean that anti-semitism gets passed on to Jews. I took from the movie that EVERYONE is culpable. I think that is what Mel wanted to portray and in that he succeded. But overall, this was not a good movie..., at least for me.

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by ConsequentAtheist, posted 02-27-2004 8:01 AM Eastern Star has not replied
 Message 59 by Phat, posted 02-28-2004 5:21 AM Eastern Star has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024