The Passion Of The Christ

Started by MacGuffin, January 28, 2003, 01:49:48 AM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Alethia

Quote from: Chest Rockwell
Quote from: GhostboySo you have me and SoNowThen and a few others who have hopes for this movie, and then everyone else who expects it to be terrible. Hopefully there will be some good debates here a month from now...

I'm with you, Ghostboy

me too

Pedro

Quote from: eward
Quote from: Chest Rockwell
Quote from: GhostboySo you have me and SoNowThen and a few others who have hopes for this movie, and then everyone else who expects it to be terrible. Hopefully there will be some good debates here a month from now...

I'm with you, Ghostboy

me too
well, goddamn sonny, me too.

Pozer


tpfkabi

i'm looking forward to the film.

i still don't understand the controversy with Jews.
whether you believe that Jesus Christ performed miracles, was the son of God or not, he was a historical person put to death by a crowd of Jewish people. it happened nearly 2000 years ago, why would a film cause a riot of any sort? it's not like this is the first film about the Gospels or Christ.
I am Torgo. I take care of the place while the Master is away.

Jeremy Blackman

It could be like Braveheart, where I love the movie aesthetically and emotionally, but strongly disagree with its morals.

The Perineum Falcon

Quote from: bigideasi'm looking forward to the film.

i still don't understand the controversy with Jews.
whether you believe that Jesus Christ performed miracles, was the son of God or not, he was a historical person put to death by a crowd of Jewish people. it happened nearly 2000 years ago, why would a film cause a riot of any sort? it's not like this is the first film about the Gospels or Christ.
I think it's cause they were the ones who put Jesus to death. I suppose they believe people will blame the Jewish folks today for it, even though the bible's been around for a pretty good while now.
We often went to the cinema, the screen would light up and we would tremble, but also, increasingly often, Madeleine and I were disappointed. The images had dated, they jittered, and Marilyn Monroe had gotten terribly old. We were sad, this wasn't the film we had dreamed of, this wasn't the total film that we all carried around inside us, this film that we would have wanted to make, or, more secretly, no doubt, that we would have wanted to live.

SoNowThen

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanIt could be like Braveheart, where I love the movie aesthetically and emotionally, but strongly disagree with its morals.

Explain???
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Jeremy Blackman

I think it's bizzare how people say "the Jews killed Jesus" like all Jewish people voted on it...

Quote from: SoNowThenExplain???
Well, William Wallace was not a nice guy... I think it's a character glorification to the point of gratuity. I don't understand how he can be deified like that.

Not to compare him with Jesus...

Ghostboy

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanI think it's bizzare how people say "the Jews killed Jesus" like all Jewish people voted on it...

Reminds me of that line from Dogme in the abortion clinic. Anyway, if you're going by the bible...the Romans crucified Jesus, but Pilate gave the Jewish leaders a choice of who would be crucified (him or another criminal), and they chose Jesus. Historically speaking, though, I don't know if there's anything to back that up.

Chest Rockwell

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanWell, William Wallace was not a nice guy...

But the movie says... :wink:

SoNowThen

Quote from: Jeremy BlackmanI think it's bizzare how people say "the Jews killed Jesus" like all Jewish people voted on it...

Quote from: SoNowThenExplain???
Well, William Wallace was not a nice guy... I think it's a character glorification to the point of gratuity. I don't understand how he can be deified like that.

Not to compare him with Jesus...

Yeah, I definitely agree with you about Wallace. That's probably the reason I didn't like that movie.

Obviously I'll be expecting to see a fairly blameless Christ though. Y'know, son of God and all that...

As to this whole "Jews killed Jesus" thing, I doubt that's what the movie is trying to say. It's just a fact that, as Ghostboy said, the Jewish leaders of that area had a hand in it. If they would've been in another country, the local leaders there would've had to make the decision. Nobody's blaming a specific group with the murder of our Messiah. He was there to die. That was the point.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.

Jeremy Blackman

Quote from: SoNowThenIt's just a fact that, as Ghostboy said,
Wait wait wait, he said "if you're going by the bible"... It may be true, but I'm not going to take for granted that the Bible is fact.

Ravi

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/15/movies/15PASS.html

(registration required)

'Passion' Film Is Scheduled for Big Opening
By SHARON WAXMAN

Published: January 15, 2004

Correction Appended

LOS ANGELES, Jan. 14 — The distributors of Mel Gibson's controversial new movie, "The Passion of the Christ," plan to release the film on 2,000 screens across the nation next month, a decision prompted by an unexpected flood of ticket requests.

"I knew it would start building and building," Bob Berney, the president of New Market Films, said of the demand, "but now it's like a tsunami." Newmarket is distributing the film for Mr. Gibson's company, Icon Productions.

"We've had a flood of calls," Mr. Berney said. "People call and say, 'I want 10,000 tickets.' "

Church groups have been ordering large blocks of tickets, and theater chains have set up toll-free numbers to take advance orders, Mr. Berney said. One multiplex in Plano, Tex., a suburb of Dallas, is planning to reserve all 20 of its screens for "The Passion" and will start showing the movie at 6:30 a.m. on its opening day, Feb. 25, which is Ash Wednesday.

The plans for a wide release are a striking development for a film that just a few months ago was having trouble finding a distributor and that was under fire from Jewish groups concerned that it carried anti-Semitic overtones. The film, in Latin and Aramaic, with subtitles, is reported to include a gory depiction of the crucifixion.

Alan Nierob, a spokesman for Mr. Gibson, said: "This is an amazing evolution. It's one of those cases where demand has completely dictated the release pattern of this film." Mr. Gibson wrote, directed, produced and paid for the $25 million movie. He was completing editing and sound mixing on the film in Los Angeles and was not available for comment on Wednesday, his spokesman said. "The Passion of the Christ" has been stirring interest and controversy for months over its depiction of both the crucifixion and Jews' role in it. Hollywood's major studios all passed on offers to distribute the film; Newmarket agreed to distribute it for a fee, as it did the sleeper hit "My Big Fat Greek Wedding."

The Anti-Defamation League has warned that the film could promote anti-Semitism at a time when it says anti-Israel and anti-Jewish sentiment is on the rise.

For his part, Mr. Gibson, who practices a traditionalist form of Catholicism, has enlisted the support of Christian groups and screened the film for Pope John Paul II and other officials at the Vatican. He has also shown the film to leading conservative figures like the writer Peggy Noonan. A grass-roots campaign among evangelical Protestants and Catholics has also stoked interest in the film.

Mr. Nierob said that the film was not meant to encourage anti-Semitism, and that Mr. Gibson was confident it would not.

"The viewpoint of the filmmaker is that that is not his intent, nor of any interest to him," Mr. Nierob said. "That's contrary to what he feels the film will accomplish."


Correction Tuesday, Jan. 20, 2004
An article on Thursday about plans for a wide release of Mel Gibson's film "The Passion of the Christ" misspelled the name of the distributor at one point and credited it mistakenly with the distribution of another film. The distributor of Mr. Gibson's movie is Newmarket Films, not New Market. "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" was distributed in the United States by IFC Films.

MacGuffin

Does R rating really tell the story of 'Passion'?
The graphic violence in Gibson's film raises the issue of what it takes to be labeled NC-17

The body on the screen is beaten to a blood-drenched pulp — flesh ripped by a cat-o'-nine-tails and rising in welts at the force of the blows. Leather sandals splash and soak in puddles of blood. It is an orgy of pain and violence.

Long, brutal scenes such as that one make up much of the yet-to-be-released film "The Passion of the Christ." While early attention has focused on whether Mel Gibson's film has the potential to inspire anti-Semitism, a viewing last week of a still-unfinished version suggests it may raise concerns about the unremitting violence of its images as well.

While not condemning the graphic nature of the film, Brother Charles Jackson, director of vocations with the California Province of the Society of Jesus, said: "It was so graphic and the scourging so long that you almost shut down. Psychologically you just can't handle it."

The issue could take on added urgency because the R-rated film is being broadly marketed to evangelical Christians, including the teen market, although Gibson has emphasized that it is not for young children.

The R designation also may cast renewed attention on the Motion Picture Assn. of America ratings system and raise questions about whether any kind of violence would be sufficient to warrant an NC-17. The rating has largely been applied to movies with explicit sexual content.

Though the Ash Wednesday release date in roughy 2,000 theaters around the country is little more than two weeks away, the film viewed last week clearly remains a work in progress with many sound, musical score and color corrections incomplete. Gibson is expected to lock in a final version of the film later in the week. This version did not include the so-called blood curse, drawn from the Gospel of Matthew, in which Jews cry out, "His blood upon us and upon our children" — a reference that had drawn fire from Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League.

"The Passion" follows the last 12 hours of Jesus' life, and from the initial beatings to the Crucifixion, Gibson (a member of a conservative religious group) spared little in his effort to create a searing vision of pain and suffering. For some religious conservatives, watching that pain is precisely the point. Others wonder if the brutality is excessive and will turn audiences away.

Paul Hetrick, vice president of media relations with the Christian group Focus on the Family, saw it in June with a group of 30. He said questions were raised about the length of the film's violent scenes as well.

"We suggested that he didn't need to go on that long," Hetrick said. But Gibson told them that he had already cut significant portions and that he wanted to maintain the film's realism.

In the end, audiences should be prepared for the realism, Hetrick suggested: "It's not entertainment. It's a very important film and a significant film."

Still, the graphic nature of the film is likely to raise the question of what it takes to get an NC-17 rating for violence — which means no one younger than 17 may attend. (In 1990, the MPAA revised the X rating to NC-17 to help separate mainstream movies from pornographic films and videos.)

The ratings are applied by a governing body of eight to 13 members who live in Los Angeles whose identities are kept confidential. These people, all of whom are parents, are selected by Jack Valenti, president of the MPAA.

The most recent film to trigger discussions about the application of NC-17 for violence was Quentin Tarantino's "Kill Bill: Vol. 1." In October, the rating board's decision not to give the film an NC-17 outraged some advocacy groups and industry critics who maintained the movie was too bloody to merit an R. Bernardo Bertolucci's film "The Dreamers," due in theaters this weekend, will be the next film to carry an NC-17, in this case for nudity and sexual content.

In America, it seems to Dan Harkins, owner of Harkins Theatres in Arizona, moviegoers are much more comfortable with violent images than sex. He has ordered extra prints of "The Passion" because of the interest it is generating and remains unconcerned about the violence.

"This is going to be a lot of families' first-time exposure to an R-rated movie," he said. "Sexual content has always been more objectionable than violence. There is a polarity between those two with the audiences. Why do the mores of this country follow such a different path than Europe? There is more of a puritanical tendency here."

While Valenti declined to comment on the decision to give an R rating to "The Passion," he speculated that perhaps the film's historical and religious currency made it possible.

"It is unethical for me to comment on this particular movie," Valenti said.

Valenti went on to say the difficulty with any ratings system is: "You are dealing with it subjectively. What is too much violence? That is a good question."

"The Passion" may force the MPAA, if not moviegoers, to grapple with finding an answer. Within Catholic and other Christian communities, there are outreach efforts to families and young people. At the same time leaders within these communities are cautioning that the depiction of Jesus' torture may be too much for some.

"I do not believe that young children under 13 should see this movie. And Mel Gibson agrees with me," said Rick Warren, senior pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest and a national evangelical leader. "This is probably the only R-rated movie I'll ever recommend that you attend. But this time R stands for 'realistic,' not 'raunchy.' "

Some say giving the film an NC-17 would have curtailed a parent's freedom to choose if they should bring their child.

"I would hate to think that the film industry would tell the parents of that child that he couldn't be taken to see it," said Ed Gamble, executive director of the Southern Baptist Assn. of Christian Schools, based in Orlando, Fla.

Gamble, who has not seen the film, says he plans to take his 15-year-old son to see "The Passion" the day it is released. The only R-rated movies he's let his son see — "The Patriot" and "Braveheart" — were also Gibson films. Gamble decided to do so, he said, because the films offered "lessons of valor and integrity."

In the case of "The Passion," it should be up to each parent to determine if a child is mature enough to watch such violence, he said.

"It would be wrong to exclude 12- and 13-year-olds if their parents think they are capable of handling the violence that they see in that movie," Gamble said. "This is not gratuitous violence. This really happened."

Indeed to some supporters of the film, the violence is a needed dose of reality.

"People ask us about the R rating. The Bible is R-rated," said Ric Olsen, senior associate pastor of Harbor Trinity Church in Costa Mesa. "We have so glamorized the cross and gilded it. This was an instrument of torture. With 'The Passion,' we get a look back through time to see that."
"Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art." - Andy Warhol


Skeleton FilmWorks

SoNowThen

Quote from: MacGuffin"I do not believe that young children under 13 should see this movie. And Mel Gibson agrees with me," said Rick Warren, senior pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest and a national evangelical leader. "This is probably the only R-rated movie I'll ever recommend that you attend. But this time R stands for 'realistic,' not 'raunchy.' "[/size]

Now, I've heard a lot of good about Rick Warren. From most accounts he is a pretty stand-up guy, and a respected church leader. But damn, it's stupid comments like this one that give my religion such a bad name. People this IS NOT a view shared by thinking Christians. "The only R movie", gimme a fucking break. Rick, get your head out of your ass. It's fuckers like this one who helped give Last Temptation all the trouble it got -- a movie I consider to be the most important "Christian" film of all time.
Those who say that the totalitarian state of the Soviet Union was not "real" Marxism also cannot admit that one simple feature of Marxism makes totalitarianism necessary:  the rejection of civil society. Since civil society is the sphere of private activity, its abolition and replacement by political society means that nothing private remains. That is already the essence of totalitarianism; and the moralistic practice of the trendy Left, which regards everything as political and sometimes reveals its hostility to free speech, does nothing to contradict this implication.

When those who hated capital and consumption (and Jews) in the 20th century murdered some hundred million people, and the poster children for the struggle against international capitalism and America are now fanatical Islamic terrorists, this puts recent enthusiasts in an awkward position. Most of them are too dense and shameless to appreciate it, and far too many are taken in by the moralistic and paternalistic rhetoric of the Left.