(Untitled)
my housemates are so loud. or rather, the housemate's girlfriend and her 2 year old daughter. thankfully, we don't share any real space, and never see each other, but i hear plenty. mainly yelling. the girlfriend is LOUD.
went and saw the passion of christ, or as i like to call it, The Christ Movie. i had some real reservations about seeing it ( Read more... )
went and saw the passion of christ, or as i like to call it, The Christ Movie. i had some real reservations about seeing it ( Read more... )
What were your expectations? You sound like someone who hates sports, yet goes to a baseball game and acts surprised when you hate it.
--
Jesus fell 'over and over and over again', because that's what happened -- the third, seventh, and ninth stations of the cross. To not show that in the movie would be akin to leaving out the crucifixion itself, or Veronica wiping his face, or the condemnation by Pontius Pilate. They are critical things, critical pieces/chapters/moments. Was your problem just that they/he used slow motion, or with the entire scenes themselves?
--
Your statement about it being 'definitely Catholic' is a bit silly, for lack of a better word. Again, it's like describing a baseball game as 'sporty' or something. Again, what did you expect? Did you think that Mel Gibson (a devout Catholic) would make a movie about the last days of Jesus, and it would somehow turn out Islamic or Buddhist or something? All I can think is that maybe you weren't making a statement of surprise, but if not, then I don't see your point in mentioning it at all.
--
Which parts weren't B-I-B-L-E?
--
As for the movie being anti-Semitic, well, in what other light would you have them portrayed? They condemned him and sentenced him to death. There's really no way of prettying that up, short of rewriting history. How did you want it done?
--
Basically, my question to you is this: If you didn't want to see it... why did you?
Reply
i'd like you to quote me the passages of the Bible that reference jesus's falling, and this station of the cross bit. immediately after viewing the film, i came home to reference the four gospels of the new testament, because i wanted to be clear in my own mind what was accurate, what was not, and what key "facts" i might've been unclear on. no where in matthew, mark, luke, or john is a woman named veronica mentioned, nor is a "station of the cross." perhaps your version of the bible is different than mine. what i find is basically this:
"Then he handed him over to them to be crucified.
So they took Jesus, and he went out, bearing his own cross, to the place called the place of a skull, which is called in Hebrew Gol'gotha. There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them."
The Gospel of John, 19.16-18 (RSV)
i expected to see a movie about christ, and therefore, christian. i was immediately struck by the very catholic interpretation of the film. mary figured far more prominently than she ever did in the gospels. in fact, i believe john is the gospel that references her as being at the cross. (gibson misinterpreted jesus's last words to her, when he says, "mother--look upon your son..." etc. in this scene, she is there (as in the film) with a disciple. jesus is comanding his disciple to care of her as if she were his own mother. he says to him, look upon her as your mother, etc, and then in the next verse, it says that the disciple took mary into his home.) the glorification of blood, suffering, and relics--the homage "veronica" pays to the bloody scarf jesus wipes his face with, zoom in to the crown of thorns once jesus has been crucified...i found this to be a very distinctive catholic marker. i was expecting to see the four gospels reenacted, not catholicized. it was unexpected.
As for the movie being anti-Semitic, well, in what other light would you have them portrayed? They condemned him and sentenced him to death. There's really no way of prettying that up, short of rewriting history. How did you want it done?
actually, pilate sentenced jesus to death, as he was the roman governor of the territory, (romans did = the ruling class, ruling people, ruling nation.) as the bible clearly states, and the movie clearly states, jews did not have the right to execute anyone. i'm not contending that the Pharisees did not call for his crucifixion--because i can read as well as the next person. the Pharisees were a very specific faction of the jewish population--priests of the temple. threatened by jesus's teaching and his undermining of their authority, and therefore, power. (and money.)
but let's not forget--jesus was also a jew.
the things that i use to judge anti-Semitism in this film are as follows:
Jesus was a Jew. not only was he a jew, he was also a mediterranean, middle eastern jew. yet who do we have portray him in this film? james caviezel, an american of irish and scandinavian blood. mary mother of jesus, is portrayed by a romanian actress. these two primary figures (especially catholically speaking), are virtually the only faces (mary magdalene being the other that immediately comes to mind) that are not historically accurate. coincidence? doubtful. one has to wonder at this interesting choice. mel gibson goes to great lengths to recreate this film historically, even down to the language spoken throughout, yet he cannot cast mediterranean or jewish actors in the roles of jesus and mary? this is wrong.
additionally, the pharisees are stereotypically jewish. they are caricatures of every jewish stereotype out there. one look at them, there is no denying they are jews.
Reply
gibson deliberately chose to make pilate a sympathetic character, again, a very catholic choice, as he has been sainted by the abyssinian church.
people will walk away from this film with the same mistaken assumption as you've made--that "the jews" condemned and sentenced jesus to death.
and the bible is certainly NOT history. it is a theological text, with very specific motivations. the earliest of the gospels wasn't written down until perhaps 30-40 years after jesus lived and died. (some good information and sources on the historical validity of the gospels.) we certainly cannot call it history, in the strictest sense of the word.
i believe i already answered the question, "why did you see it?", but i'll address it again. it's fairly simple--i was curious. i wanted to form my own opinion. i saw it, and i did.
i believe i've addressed issues that were non-biblical as they've come up.
feel free to follow up if you have questions, comments, contention.
Reply
I hope I never get in an argument with you.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Thanks for your well thought-out (well-thought out? well thought out? I literally just woke up two minutes ago, so shaddup. :D) comments. I don't have much to say in response. I'm sure there are two sides to every story, and that each point you made can, in turn, be rebutted. I'll let someone else do that. :) I'm content to let the movie stand as it is -- inaccurate though it may (or may not) be.
I did want to say something about the anti-Jew bit, though. If people walk out of the movie and start hating Jews because of it, they are stupid. S-T-U-P-I-D. I mean, please, did people walk out of Schindler's List and start hating Germans? (Possibly, but I hope not.)
Perhaps the Jews condemned (and by condemned, I don't mean that they actually handed down the combination (wtf? I meant 'condemnation'; my mind wandered... I'm tired.), but that the events in the movie actually happened. Perhaps they did not. Whether they did or not, however, should (note I say 'should', not 'will') have no bearing on modern day views toward Jewish people. I'm sure there are people out there stupid enough to watch the movie and say 'd00d jews sux0r lets kick they're [sic] asses!!11111' or whatever, but hey, there are always going to be stupid people like that. :)
This post is nearly incoherent and is not flowing well at all. I apologise. My head is in outer space, spinning right 'round like a record baby, right 'round 'round 'round. Totally babbling... cannot form .. thoughts. I shouldn't even post this, but I think I might have made some points I wanted to make that I might not be able to recreate later, so, here you go.
Everyone reading this, please note that I really am intelligent (shut up, peanut gallery) and that right now I'm just sick and tired (literally) and and and.
Reply
there is more honor you know, in simply admitting defeat, or walking away quietly.
Reply
I admit that I'm wrong countless times; ask Tracey. If I'm wrong, I will admit it. How can anyone 'win' a 'debate' on whether a movie is good or not? It's an opinion! There is no right or wrong! I liked it, and she didn't. I wished to find out more information than her short, bulleted list afforded me, and I did so. End of story.
There are lots of things I put off and say I'll 'get back to later'. An example is the survey questions Kristee sent to me. Was it a debate? No. Did I say I'd get back to it later? Yes. Did I? Yes. Am I saying that in this case? No. I have no plans at this time to revisit this topic with her. If we meet in person, and she wants to discuss it further, I would welcome that, although I suspect I would probably care very little to do so -- not because I'm afraid of 'losing' (again, it's about opinions, where no one can win or lose anyhow), but because I just don't care enough about it. I'm not going to waste my time trying to convince her that the movie was good. She's capable of making up her own mind, and she has done so. I feel absolutely no need to 'convince' her that the movie was good, or that the events in it were accurately portrayed. I can't say for certain that they were, anymore than she can say for certain that they aren't. My beliefs are faith-based, which is very hard to argue. I have nothing to show her, no tangible evidence that what took place was accurate.
Well, I have a headache, I'm tired, and I'm pressed for time, which should cover all the types of excuses you said I use (their validity is, I assume, of no concern to you). Good day.
Reply
Reply
just found this link while doing some research on the roman coliseum for a book. found it interesting.
Reply
Mel Gibson's belief that non-Catholics are going to Hell is just that: Mel Gibson's belief. That is not what the Catholic church teaches anymore (post-Vatican II counsel, which was in the 60s). For any human being to say who's going to Heaven and who's going to Hell, well, that's just plain wrong. Judge not...
I didn't understand what the article/letter said about Mary being able to see Satan. I remember Satan appearing in the movie, but I don't remember Mary being able to see him. Just because I don't remember it (or didn't pick up on that?) doesn't mean it didn't happen, though, so I dunno. I'm not always the best at picking up on things, so it's possible I might have just missed that part. *shrug* I've only seen the movie once, too. I'm sure I'll watch it again sometime.
As for the 'how can this movie save?' part, well, duh, it can't. Who said it could or would?! Jeez. That's retarded. If Mel Gibson ever said this movie can save, then he's retarded, too, 'cause that's just stupid. We are saved by the Lord's salvation, and nothing else. Certainly not a Hollywood movie! Now, can a book or a movie put someone on the right path to salvation? Sure. But it doesn't save. The Passion is not going to 'save' anyone. It might help. It might hurt. Who knows? But in and of itself, it's just a freakin' movie. hehe
Btw, how'd you find this post to even make this comment? Just... took the time to go through all the posts? Or'd you have it ... not bookmarked... wtf's LJ call it................. drawing a blank. OH! Did you have it as a memory or something? Just curious. (Was shocked to see a comment from 'kayristee', too!)
Hope all's well with you. Sorry you can't make it to the wedding! We'll post pictures when we get back, I'm sure. :)
Reply
no, you don't understand my memory--i just know where to find things/posts from myself or other people, if they struck me enough. i remember the topic/how many comments were posted/approximate if not exact date of post. hehe. its a little used but powerful skill. ;)
anyway, i'm not forcing the points drawn by the author of the letter, but i felt it was a good argument, coming from a christian, not a cynic such as myself.
and i do think many people (christians of various denominations) were touting the film as a tool of scripture/a way to save, etc. that's why whole congregations were going to see it, and persons of strong religious conviction were encouraging everyone to view it. that's part of what frustrated me about the inaccuracies in the film.
anyhoodle, hope the last minute wedding stuff is going well. i'm really bummed that i can't be there. i'd been really counting on being there, and i will pester you both nonstop until i see many, many pictures.
when do you get back from the honeymoon?
Reply
We get back from the honeymoon Sunday, 6 March. Don't expect pictures right away though. :P Pretend we don't get back until July. ;)
Reply
Leave a comment