|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Mar 5th, 2004 05:02 PM | |||
| The_Rorschach | Fine! Go ahead and agree! See if I interject into future conversations > : ( | ||
| Mar 4th, 2004 11:09 AM | |||
| mburbank | See, if Abcdxxder and I agree this much on something, I think you should go with it just on the statistical improbability alone. | ||
| Mar 4th, 2004 01:15 AM | |||
| Abcdxxxx |
It's a film that rejects 2000 years of historical, theological, and even archealogical progress. On top of it, their only marketing plan was to bait Jews into calling it AntiSemetic. That his Dad is heating up into full gear with his Holocaust denial business helps too. The film takes place during a period that defined antisemetism and Blood Libels against Jews ever since. Jesus was one of MANY Jews who were oppressed for being too Jewy, for studying Torah, and for being "nationalistic" by answering to Jewish Laws above the rule of the land. As a result Jews broke into various factions to deal with the Romans. It was only a specific denomination of Jews that were involved with the crucifixions, and their role was a result of infighting and politics within the religion. None of this makes it into the Gospels, or Gibson's film, because it's too confusing, and less interesting then pornographic gore, and finger pointing. Without any real Jewish characters of substance in the film, it's unlikely this is going to do much good when it plays the Czech Republic, or Syria, or France. |
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 06:58 PM | |||
| Vibecrewangel |
Language Spanglish....Californians speak Spanglish |
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 06:49 PM | |||
| The_Rorschach |
"Funnier yet is the fact that the Latin is perhaps 5the largest historical innacuracy. While some of the players (pilot certainly) would have known Latin, the common tongue was Greek. The Roman army and the Roman civil service were multicultural, and the language they all had in common and spoke to each other wasn't Latin, it was Greek." That is a debatable point Herr Burbank. See, though Greek was a far more popular language, it was fashionable to be as Roman as possible even outside of the Roman Empire. I mean, just consider the remarkable leverage Paul recieved once he claimed his Roman citizenship - An appearance before Caesar himself in Rome, if memory serves. In a society where every privilege could be bought, from the citizenship to the broad strip on their toga, true cultural currency was covetted - And for good reason. You say it is innaccurate that they mostly spoke Latin, but from everything I have studied from the period, I would say its a fair representation. Sure, languages mixed promiscuously, but the common tongue of the Roman soldiers, and their sycophants and sympathizers would still have been Latin. I mean, would you say a documentary on 20th Century California filmed a few hundred years from now should be spoken in Spanish because there are large segments of the population that are ignorant of the Queen's English? |
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 06:23 PM | |||
| Vibecrewangel |
Ack Okay so the other Robert Englund DeSade move was about Eugenie and was called Night Terrors. My bad. |
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 06:06 PM | |||
| Vibecrewangel |
Ack Suffering...... And It appears you have done some of that. Recently. |
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 06:00 PM | |||
| mburbank | Try to remember I'm old. They did an electrocrdiagram on me at my last physical as a mtter of course. Then they did something a lot less pleasant. What were we talking about? | ||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 05:33 PM | |||
| Vibecrewangel |
DeSade Quills was excellent. So was a really strange adaption of Justine that Robert Englund was in. He is so dang creepy..... The literary crowd thought I was a little off. That pleased me greatly. These days I'm told I creep out hard core fetishists and real (non hot topic) goths. (what the hell is a real goth?) The statement "someday I'm going to be interviewed and I'll say 'but she seemed so normal' " has been applied to me. Recently. When my mother found the books she was a bit miffed, I had to remind her that it was her fetish magazines that had sparked my interest. We didn't have much an argument after that. And my grandmother.....she read them too. She was disturbed and yet enjoyed them in her own way. She still laughs about them when I come to dinner. No wonder I'm a freak..... Though I do not find beauty so much in suffering as in how it is presented. As bad as the movie was, Strangeland had some of the most incredible body alterations in it. And though the plot was subpar, the scenes from inside the head of the killer in The Cell were gorgeous. I have a feeling that Mels will make me sick. As well it should to be honest. |
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 04:21 PM | |||
| mburbank |
I bet carrying around the desade books made you a very popular young lady with the literary crowd. I'm a fan of the grotesque, but I don't care for Desade, or the story of O for that matter, which is like Desade with vaseline on the lens. After the five hundreth anal pillaging I just can't care. Some fine films have been made about desade, though. I haven't seen Quills, but heard it was good, and both the play and film "The Death of Marat as peformed by the inmates of the whatever insane asylum and direct by the Marquis Desade" are excellent. I think Desade and Gibson (though neither would care to embrace the other I'm sure) have a shared interest in the beauty of suffering. I'm not put off, but neither doe it do anything for me. |
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 03:28 PM | |||
| Vibecrewangel |
Passion Quote:
The first time he was holding an umbrella that served as a lightning rod. And freaky as it sounds.....once you have been struck by lightning your chances of being hit again actually go UP. When I read about this all I kept seeing in my head was the Family Guy episode where Brian the Dog grabs Peter and slaps him back and forth across the face saying "GOD....IS....PISSED" I will probably see this out of simple curiosity. In high school I bought and read EVERYTHING I could find written by DeSade. I ended up thinking that he made the most atrocious acts sound beautiful. Some people find art and beauty in the strangest places. Clearly.....I'm one of them. |
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 03:28 PM | |||
| soundtest |
And I had no idea that Jesus invented modern table height 
|
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 03:07 PM | |||
| Perndog |
I thought Jesus was the "saving grace". 
|
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 01:39 PM | |||
| Brandon |
Quote:
|
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 11:17 AM | |||
| soundtest |
I downloaded this last night. Definitely interesting to see, but the violence was so over the top it was almost ridiculous. I found it to drag on quite a bit... after about an hour in Jesus is basically a bloody pile of moaning ground beef staring blankly into space... I found myself thinking "JUST FUCKING DIE ALREADY" (in all caps). Still worth seeing though, imo. Quote:
|
||
| Mar 3rd, 2004 12:17 AM | |||
| Guderian |
I'm not a Christian, but I've decided to see it anyway. If they make a sequel, which I hope they do, I'll see that too. From the reviews I've read, Brandon is right about Gibson adding things from non-biblical sources. I've also read some Protestant reviews that describe it as having a distinctly Catholic flavour, while I've read others that say it manages to appeal to all Christians without relying too much on Catholic dogma that Protestants would disagree with. I suppose I shall have to wait and see for myself. |
||
| Mar 2nd, 2004 07:40 PM | |||
| Brandon |
When I say it's a movie for Christians I don't mean that non-Christians won't think of it as a good movie. What I'm saying is that it has been geared towards current or prospective believers. Why? Because Mel Gibson called it "historically accurate." He doesn't operate under the pretense that he's just following the Gospels, and he never claimed to be doing so. To Saint Mel, everything from the demon kids to the splitting apart of the temple is the naked truth, and the movie reflects that viewpoint. And guess what? He doesn't even follow the Gospels that well. A great deal of the scenes and portrayals in the movie (particularly the level of violence inflicted on Jesus, Satan's appearance in Gethsemane, and Pilate's wife) came not from the Bible but from the "visions" of Sister Anne Catherine Emmerich, a Catholic nun whose experiences (which were accepted by the Catholic church) are recorded in "The Dolorous Passion." This isn't a historical account. It's not even literary adaptation. It's theology, and that means Christians (specifically Catholics, it seems) are the target audience. |
||
| Mar 2nd, 2004 03:52 PM | |||
| Bobo Adobo |
I wouldn't say this movie is for Christians either. Me being more towards atheism and agnostism, I didn't find this film very preachy at all. It basically told the story right from the bible, and was well done cinematically. If you like good movies, go see this movie. Plain and simple. Not really going to get in depth because there are already MULTIPLE THREADS ABOUT THIS MOVIE! 
|
||
| Mar 2nd, 2004 03:37 PM | |||
| Ronnie Raygun |
This was a great movie and I don't think it's only for Christians. I think everyone should go see it to make their own judgement. I think to call it anti-semetic is silly. |
||
| Mar 2nd, 2004 12:36 PM | |||
| Perndog | Yeah, it bothered me that they made so much out of the scourging which occupied less than one full sentence in three of the four gospels and was absent in the fourth. | ||
| Mar 2nd, 2004 03:26 AM | |||
| Brandon |
I saw it tonight. First of all, it's not the movie event of the millenium. Secondly, it's a movie strictly for Christians. Christians will most assuredly be wailing, sobbing, and beating their breasts over this, but to a non-believer (like yours truly) it won't have the same effect. It's a good piece of filmmaking, don't get me wrong, but I wouldn't give it the same kind of praise that I've seen so far in the media. The cinematography is excellent and the musical score is gorgeous, but it's a generally disturbing film (I'm aware that was the intent, by the way) and a few elements even make it border on.. corny. It's violent. Holy shit is it ever violent. It's the most violent movie I've ever seen, and I say that in all sincerity. It's so gruesome, in fact, that it becomes absurd at times. Jesus, for example, is scourged by the centurions for nearly a half hour. Every time there's a lull in the action, Gibson fills it with a random flogging of either Jesus or a bystander. At one point, the cross lands on top of Jesus, jamming the crown of thorns deep into his skull, complete with sickening sound effect and spurt of blood. With all this abuse, it's remarkable there was anything left of J.C. when he finally made it up to Golgotha. In reality, he would have been dead by the end of the scourging scene, but Gibson doesn't have to pander to paltry things like "medical accuracy." Saint Mel is working from the Gospels, after all. But then again, the Gospels don't go into tremendous detail about the degree of violence inflicted on Jesus, and a lot of the more gruesome moments, like the aforementioned crown of thorns incident, are Mel's own ideas. Mel's own ideas, by the way, are hit and miss, and he takes some other bizarre liberties in addition to the excess gore. For example, he throws in an omnipresent Satan figure and a gang of demon children that terrorize a guilt-stricken Judas. These little additions in particular were probably intended to be "deep and meaningful," but they just come across as hokey and unnecessary. Gibson also creates a major character out of an obscure line (Matthew 27:19) with Pontius Pilate's wife, Claudia. She's involved in two scenes that are found nowhere in the Gospels, one of which is a discussion with her husband about how Caiaphas is just so darn intimidating to a brutal Roman governor. And that brings me to the big question: is it anti-semitic? Well.. maybe. Gibson removed the big offending line (Matthew 27:25), but apparently there were still objections even after he did so. Caiaphas and the Sanhedrin, to be sure, do not get sympathetic portrayals, coming across more like Emperor Palpatine (Star Wars) clones with their heavy cloaks, beady eyes, and hideous laughter. Then again, once the centurions come into the picture, they quickly become the most loathsome, sadistic characters in the movie, so it would be hard to say that the blame has been planted squarely on one group of people. Mel's message seems to be more about what pieces shit of we all are. Yeah, it's the feel good movie of the year. The subtitles may be intimidating, but they really aren't an issue. After a few minutes, you hardly even notice you're reading them. The languages are effective for the most part, though there are a few questionable pronunciations here and there. Overall it is a good film. However, it is, like I said, a film for Christians. A devout type will most likely think it's the most extraordinary thing he or she has ever seen while others will sit and wonder what Saint Mel was trying to say. Is the audience supposed to be inspired or repulsed? Has he intended for Christians to leave with a feeling of warmth or overwhelming guilt? Who knows? I don't believe in this shit anyway. |
||
| Feb 26th, 2004 05:53 PM | |||
| Perndog |
Quote:
|
||
| Feb 26th, 2004 04:59 PM | |||
| davinxtk |
Didn't the actor who plays Christ get struck my lightening twice during filming? Most people who get struck my lightening get it once IN THEIR ENTIRE LIVES, let alone twice WHILE ON THE SET OF THE SAME MOVIE. Not to mention the weeeeee percentage of people who actually fall victim to such an event in the first place. |
||
| Feb 26th, 2004 04:55 PM | |||
| ScruU2wice |
Quote:
Speaking of art. A girl in my art class said that the movie was very accurate I bet jesus is sitting somewhere crying  I'm definatly gonna rent this movie though... |
||
| Feb 26th, 2004 04:34 PM | |||
| davinxtk |
Quote:
I hate to post a spoiler, but at the end of the last twelve hours of Christ's life... he dies! Big fucking surprise. I bet you saw Titanic, knowing full-well how it would end. |
||
| This thread has more than 25 replies. Click here to review the whole thread. | |||
