posted February 28, 2004 12:05 PM         

Churches have been carting busloads to it. Very good marketing on this film.

Moondreamer, I believe the story is pretty basic-or at least I know its based on the most popular book ever published-

Its about the last 12 hours of Jesus Christ's life, with some flashbacks.

I have been wanting to see it since I heard Mel was making it, but now I am unsure. It has been called "a sacred snuff film." Theres ALOT of violence and blood. That's my issue with Christianity in general- a glorification of violence and suffering.
I will give you a review after tonight.

posted February 28, 2004 12:57 PM         

juniperb

posted February 28, 2004 01:09 PM         

I have not seen it myself, and I do plan to see it soon, but so far I've heard reviews calling it the most violent movie they've ever seen.

posted February 28, 2004 02:21 PM         

Thought I'd share.

Oh yeah.. I too, heard about the lady who died from a heart attack after seeing the crucifiction.

February 26, 2004
OP-ED COLUMNIST
Stations of the Crass
By MAUREEN DOWD

Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.

Mel Gibson and George W. Bush are courting bigotry in the name of sanctity.

The moviemaker wants to promote "The Passion of the Christ" and the president wants to prevent the passion of the gays.

Opening on two screens: W.'s stigmatizing as political strategy and Mel's stigmata as marketing strategy.

Mr. Gibson, who told Diane Sawyer that he was inspired to make the movie after suffering through addictions, found the ultimate 12-step program: the Stations of the Cross.

I went to the first show of "The Passion" at the Loews on 84th Street and Broadway; it was about a quarter filled. This is not, as you may have read, a popcorn movie. In Latin and Aramaic with English subtitles, it's two gory hours of Jesus getting flayed by brutish Romans at the behest of heartless Jews.

Perhaps fittingly for a production that licensed a jeweler to sell $12.99 nail necklaces (what's next? crown-of-thorns prom tiaras?), "The Passion" has the cartoonish violence of a Sergio Leone Western. You might even call it a spaghetti crucifixion, "A Fistful of Nails."

Writing in The New Republic, Leon Wieseltier, the literary editor, scorns it as "a repulsive, masochistic fantasy, a sacred snuff film" that uses "classically anti-Semitic images."

I went with a Jewish pal, who tried to stay sanguine. "The Jews may have killed Jesus," he said. "But they also gave us `Easter Parade.' "

The movie's message, as Jesus says, is that you must love not only those who love you, but more importantly those who hate you.

So presumably you should come out of the theater suffused with charity toward your fellow man.

But this is a Mel Gibson film, so you come out wanting to kick somebody's teeth in.

In "Braveheart" and "The Patriot," his other emotionally manipulative historical epics, you came out wanting to swing an ax into the skull of the nearest Englishman. Here, you want to kick in some Jewish and Roman teeth. And since the Romans have melted into history . . .

Like Mr. Gibson, Mr. Bush is whipping up intolerance but calling it a sacred cause.

At first, the preacher-in-chief resisted conservative calls for a constitutional ban on gay marriage. He felt, as Jesus put it in the Gibson script (otherwise known as the Gospels), "If it is possible, let this chalice pass from me."

But under pressure from the Christian right, he grabbed the chalice with both hands and swigged — seeking to set a precedent in codifying discrimination in the Constitution, a document that in the past has been amended to correct discrimination by giving fuller citizenship rights to blacks, women and young people.

If the president is truly concerned about preserving the sanctity of marriage, as one of my readers suggested, why not make divorce illegal and stone adulterers?

Our soldiers are being killed in Iraq; Osama's still on the loose; jobs are being exported all over the world; the deficit has reached biblical proportions.

And our president is worrying about Mars and marriage?

When reporters tried to pin down White House spokesman Scott McClellan yesterday on why gay marriage is threatening, he spouted a bunch of gobbledygook about "the fabric of society" and civilization.

The pols keep arguing that institutions can't be changed when, in fact, they change all the time. Haven't they ever heard of the institution of slavery?

The government should not be trying to legislate what's sacred.

When Bushes get in trouble, they look around for a politically advantageous bogeyman. Lee Atwater tried to make Americans shudder over the prospect of Willie Horton arriving on their doorstep; and now Karl Rove wants Americans to shudder at the prospect of a lesbian — Dick Cheney's daughter Mary, say — setting up housekeeping next door with her "wife."

When it comes to the Bushes' willingness to stir up base instincts of the base, it is as it was.

As the Max von Sydow character said in Woody Allen's "Hannah and Her Sisters," while watching a TV evangelist appealing for money: "If Jesus came back and saw what's going on in his name, he'd never stop throwing up."

posted February 28, 2004 09:34 PM         

See, if it were an English film, the violence wouldn't be a problem. I could just cover my eyes when I knew something was going to happen but still know what was going on through the dialogue. But it's in subtitles...

Plus, I think I know how it ends *laughs at own joke*.

posted February 29, 2004 01:50 AM         

The lead actor DID get struck by lightening while on the cross. The actor's initials are JC, and he was 33 years old when filming.

There's a lot of synchronistic events like that.

.gloria

posted February 29, 2004 02:01 AM         

Maureen Dowd- gotta love her. She makes neo cons almost as angry as Rush makes liberals.

I knew, I knew, I wasn't ACTUALLY going to see it. I just had that FEELING, when we were making plans to do so on Wednesday.

We arrived 40 minutes early, and the house was full. The only seats left were a scattered few in the "lean back and look straight up" section. No thanks, I can't watch a movie like that. We got our money back and bailed out.

I am not sad. I don't think, upon introspection, that I want to watch a 2 hour long holy bloodfest. I was told they used an actually dead corpse for the hammer and nails scene.

My stomach started churning, looking around at all these honest faces, typical Midwestern stock, stuffing their mouths with popcorn and yukking it up, anticipating the torture and murder of Their Chosen Savior in bright red swaths from Hollywood's finest.

I had to walk away. I can no longer blandly accept or interact with on a personal level, a faith that needs death for salvation.

Sorry for the visuals, folks.

posted February 29, 2004 12:44 PM         

Dear Goddess I hope this is not some kind of prophesy.

As a witch and anarchist I often worry that if society were to turn to the dark side I and others like me would be some of the first to be hunted down..

------------------
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection:
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is lead forward by thee into ever-widening thought and action--
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country (or our world!!) awake.

posted February 29, 2004 04:36 PM         

I have not seen this movie yet, but plan to see it in the very near future.

I don't understand all the bruhaha about the film, from what I understand it is a fairly accurate, if graphic, portrayal of the last 12 hours of Jesus' life.

Well now... let us face the facts. Jesus was tortured, suffered and killed at the hands of the Jews (of which he was one) and the Romans. How could that possibly construed as anti-semetic?

It strikes me that it would be a good thing for people to actually see... how he was brutalized and hung to die on a cross in public forum. We did this! People chose to kill that which they did not understand.

Why is it ok to watch war movies and movies about everything from Gladiators to Terminators to Freddy Kruger, but then we blanche at the depiction of the Passion of the Christ? I don't get it.

Perhaps if we take a good, long, hard look at ourselves and what we are capable of doing to one who claimed nothing other than that he was (and that we ALL are) the son of God, we can prevent such atrocities in the future.

But, what do I know... perhaps I will better understand after seeing the film for myself.

Bright Blessings...
A

posted February 29, 2004 07:32 PM         

I agree it will probably be close to reality; knowing it happened is hurtful enough so I will pass on watching the particulars. Also, I agree it isn`t anti-semetic. I would love to hear your opinion on it when you do see it!!

juniperb

posted March 01, 2004 02:08 AM         

Aselzion, you said-
"It strikes me that it would be a good thing for people to actually see... how he was brutalized and hung to die on a cross in public forum. We did this! People chose to kill that which they did not understand."
(.....and)
"Perhaps if we take a good, long, hard look at ourselves and what we are capable of doing to one who claimed nothing other than that he was (and that we ALL are) the son of God, we can prevent such atrocities in the future."

I agree with you on this. We should look at it as if WE (as in humanity as a whole) did this. Unfortunetly not everyone sees it that way.
We are not all Jewish and it is the Jewish people who are graphically depicted torturing and murdering Jesus.
Many people would rather project their demons out onto a separate group of people rather than see that the shadow figure actually dwells within their own hearts.

I think the point is that The Passion makes it very easy for people to do this projection and gets them all riled up.

Here, I'll just share the exerpt that got me thinkin about all this stuff...

quote:

---

Exerpt from Boulder Weekly

(snip)What is perhaps most tragic in the way the writers of the Gospels portrayed the death of Jesus is the role given to the Jewish people in the story. This is best summarized by the infamous passage in Matthew (27:25), "His blood be on us and our children." This implies that Jews–past, present and future–are responsible for the death of Jesus and bear collective guilt. This notion has been the cause of unfathomable levels of hatred and persecution of Jews, including the Holocaust, during which six million Jews were murdered in World War II Europe. Given the rupture between Judaism and Christianity during the time the Gospels were written, and in deference to the early Christians’ need to grow their fledgling religion without incurring the wrath of the occupying Romans, it is understandable that the authors of the Gospels transferred the blame for the crucifixion from Pontius Pilate, the Roman governor, to the Jews.

Throughout 1,900 years of Christian-Jewish history, passion plays–the depiction of the trial, crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus–have been staged throughout the world, primarily during Holy Week, the week leading up to Easter. Historically, this has been the time that Jews have been most vulnerable, as charges of deicide (killing God) have been used as the justification for anti-Semitism. Particularly, during and immediately following the Middle Ages, enraged passion play spectators often invaded Jewish ghettos to exact revenge on innocent Jews for killing Jesus.

The year 1934 marked the introduction of what has become the world’s best known passion play in Oberammergau, Germany. Adolph Hitler attended the inaugural performance and gave it his eager blessing. "Never has the menace of Jewry been so convincingly portrayed," said Hitler, who expressed his hope that the play would become a vehicle for convincing the German population of his anti-Semitic objectives. Oberammergau is in very close proximity to the Dachau concentration camp where some 35,000 Jews were exterminated within the next decade.

In 1965, at the Second Vatican Council in Rome, the Roman Catholic Church took formal steps to correct this misinterpretation of the passion. In its document, Nostra Aetate, the Church officially repudiated both the deicide charge and all forms of anti-Semitism. Most Protestant churches followed suit, and since 1965 many Christians have worked cooperatively with Jews to correct anti-Semitic interpretations within Christian theology. Understanding the influential role that passion plays have exercised in the spread of anti-Semitism, the Catholic Church today urges great caution in all dramatic presentations of the passion to ensure that they not furnish any impetus for anti-Semitic attitude or behavior.

Despite this, it’s hard to imagine the portrayal of the Jews in The Passion being more negative.(snop)

---

posted March 01, 2004 04:09 AM         

I find the constant cry of "anti- Semite" tiresome.

Let me make myself clear, before I continue.
I do not deny the Holocaust, I believe it was a horrid abomination in the history of humanity.

BUT....whereas I do not condone the discrimination of any group, be it racial, national, sexual, or what have you. Neither will I choose a group and exault them before all others.

I am by no means an expert of Jewish history or thought. Why is it in current times, one cannot offer a critcism of Israel without being deemed anti-semetic? Why is a movie despicting the history of Jesus automatically picketed as "flaming hatred of Jews?" I am uncomfortable with Gibson's new found religious zealotry, as I would be with any public figures'. What I have perceived is his wish to be "historically accurate." Hence, the Aramaic and Latin.

I find it hard to believe that there are STILL sects of Christianity running around whispering "the Jews killed Jesus." IF individuals choose to believe the Bible as historical documentation (I do not) we are presented a story of 2 groups of people- Romans and Jews. Jesus was a Jew. Technically, the Romans killed Jesus- yet the Vatican is in Rome. WTF???

(on second thought, there are probably some idiots that DO say this. I rank them right with the Jerry Falwells that blamed 911 on homosexuals and feminists- under the class called raving morons.)

I know this is oversimplification, and most of it is derived from my observations of current events. In light of what is happening to Palestinians (the wall, the "id badges" the killing on both sides) I feel that altho those of Jewish heritage have due course to feel persecuted, doing unto their neighbors what was done to them and then shouting "anti-semite" if they are criticized is hypocritical.

I bring this up because this movie is about religion, and with the current struggles in the Middle East, religion is the flash point. I am trying to understand why we are still killing over ideas and acts that are over 2000 years old, scenes of human history that cannot even be proven by tangible means. Faith is a wonderous thing, but when it leads to genocide, war, and possible global destruction, I need more than some ancient manuscripts to justify the hate.

Maybe thats why I don't want to see the "Passion." I don't need reminders of killing for God. All I have to do is read the papers to see that.

I hope everyone reads this and can see I am not trying to be hateful or bigoted. I am seeking to understand the whys of the situation.

posted March 01, 2004 07:03 PM         

THEN, there were gorey, cruel, torturous scenes on TV........that was more than enough for me......

THEN my county newspaper had a large story on it and they said Mel Gibson went too, too far with the violence. (detailing how bad it got)

That made up my mind for me.

I am Ultra-Sensitive and don't need to see it.

Yes, as someone mentioned, let's not forget the others whom were tortured and crucified upon the cross.

posted March 02, 2004 04:05 AM         

At 2am I stumble upon a History Channel special- "History vs. Hollywood" about the Passion.

If any of you see a repeat of this, I HIGHLY recommend it. It was done very well, great panel of guests.
They feature mini-docs and lots of scenes from the movie...so now I wonder. "ok, maybe I need to rethink this..."

( I rebuke thee, Libra!! Get back with you!)

The panel comprised of the moderator, the manging editor of Newsweek Jon Menchan, Univ of New Mexico Classics Prof Monica Cyrino, and film critic Joel Siegal.
Joel made the comment that the other two panelists were the Christians, worried about anti-semitism, whereas he was the Jew, and had no problems with the movie. He said, that even being on the "alert" for references, he did not feel threatened or alarmed at all. Joel also commented that those members of the Jewish community claiming anti-semetism had not seen the movie when the controversy began, and it was based on assumptions as to what the general content of passion plays are.

In my own words, I would like to apologize for bringing political issues into this forum. I realize the appropriate forum would be under Global Unity. I am sorry.

But after seeing this show, I have hope that perhaps the movie will inspire dialogue that may actually improve relations between Jews and the rest of the global community. I think that is a distinct possibility, being that any movie based on the passion, historically, is heralded by its generation as the most watched movie of the time.

What caught my interest again was a clip shown...Jesus is doing the confrontation with Satan, the moment where he is more human than holy (Gesthamane, right? I don't remember.) and he is talking to his Father. He is, however, addressing the Moon.

(BTW....Satan looks alot like Uma Thurman in a Hobbit robe..)

The critics also say its the performance of the woman who plays Mary that sends the message home. She puts the human element in all this divine suffering. I appreciate that- the essence of some sort of feminine qualities (instead of demonizing the female) making it a story for all.

So.....if anyone can watch this show, its highly recommended by yours truly!

posted March 02, 2004 12:46 PM         

No. It is a cleverly marketed movie designed to make people huge sums of money. Mel Gibson worked with a small Christian production company (forget the name) who specialize in target marketing to churches. These people are experts in getting their low-budget movies to the masses (har har - sorry) Mel used their grassroots method for his big budget movie – NOT to supplement sermons and get people back to church. NO! To make money!!!

Are any of the proceeds going to any kind of charity? Does anyone know?

I am a "fallen Catholic" I have no clearly identified beliefs right now. I am working through it. I believe in a higher consciousness - i have no idea what form that it takes, but I believe that the bible is mostly a mythic tale.

But even if I just believe in Jesus as a cool historical figure, not so much the son of god, I am still convinced that this rebellious, kind guy would be horrified to know that in 2004 he was merely a slick marketing tool to make film companies and churches money,