-
The Passion Of The Christ
Posted by
Yoda
on 01 Mar, 2004 10:16
-
Did anyone else on the board see this movie. I tried to get tickets for this on Ash Wednesday, but it was near impossible. I got tickets for my fiance and I to see it Friday night.
Pre-Show
What is it with movie theatres and mobile consession stands. If you want some popcorn and a soda, get off your ass and go to the stand. They had 3 carts walking around like it was a baseball game, and all while the trailers were playing. I got in an argument with one of the guys because I wanted to watch the trailers and not hear if he did or did not have Diet Cherry Coke. But I digress.
The Movie
I thought that this was one of the best movies I\'ve seen in a long time, if not ever. And I have to say that I did not get any anti-semetic tones from it as some of the critics were pointing out. Most of the controversial moments were taken verbatim out of the Gospels. This movie was not for the weak stomach. This was probably the bloodiest and most violent movie I\'ve ever seen. It makes movies like Braveheart and Saving Private Ryan look like a disney flick. And the fact that the movie was in Aramaic, Latin and Hebrew, to me, made the movie more effective, more literal.
But I think that it was a great experience overall. I can\'t say that I enjoyed the movie, because how can you take enjoyment of someone being pyhsically abused for two hours. But it was moviing and powerful and people are definitely expressing that with $117 million at the box office in 3 days and 1 night.
Anyone have any thoughts?
-
-
#1 Reply
Posted by
FrankZappa
on 01 Mar, 2004 11:07
-
i\'m gonna catch it next weekend, but just saw a commercial for "History vs. Holywood: The Passion of the Christ" tonight on History channel at 11pm. The history vs. Hollywood series takes movies and shows what really happened and what the movies got wrong/right.
an example: passion shows the nail going through palm of his hands to hold him on the cross, and it is known that this didnt happen. All roman crusifictions put the nail through the wrist between the two main bones. This way, the weight of the body rests on the wrist bones, which were strong enough to hold the body up. Putting the nail through the palm would have caused the body to fall off of the cross becasue the bodys weight would have ripped the hands appart.
-
-
#2 Reply
Posted by
Yoda
on 01 Mar, 2004 11:32
-
Paul,
From what I\'ve read, normally arms were tied with just rope and there was a platform of some sorts under the legs because if the arms were hanging and the weight of the body was pulling down for any amount of time, it would cause a quick and timely death via axficiation (spelling) and the person would die. That is why a person could live on the cross for several days, slowly dying. If they were lucky, their legs would be broken so that there was nothing to sustain them and death would be quick.
Here are some intersting reads if you want to check out some controversial views.
Holy Blood, Holy Grail - Discusses the fact that Jesus may not have died on the cross and that he was in fact married to Mary Magdalene. There is some history that points to the fact that Mary was not a prositute and that her family was royal, descending from the tribe of Benjamin (which I belive was the tribe in which Soloman was from). It is suggested that they had a child, who by birth right could sit on the thrown of Jerusalem, since Mary was of the tribe of Benjamin and Jesus was a direct descendent of David.
The Gospel of Mary Magdalene - I haven\'t read this one yet, but have it in the collection of books to be read. This was part of the Gnostic Gospels that were found in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Supposedly there were over 30 gospels writting at one point.
Food for thought
-
-
-
GREAT MOVIE.......
Realistic
Great Drama
And I loved the Evilness and demons that were present....
Mel Gibson is an amazing film maker...
It\'s just a movie.....A story being told......and it did just that....
I dont see where there should be any controversy coming off of this, but I guess that people arent happy unless they have something to
**** about....Janets tit, Mel Gibson is an Anti-Semite, etc......
-
-
#4 Reply
Posted by
aJwvof
on 01 Mar, 2004 12:21
-
i heard that if you aren\'t of christian upbringing that you don\'t get it as much and that if it is just that a movie there is no back story to it
-
-
#5 Reply
Posted by
Yoda
on 01 Mar, 2004 12:48
-
I\'m not sure if I buy that. Yes, it might have a deeper meaning to people who were raised Catholic / Christian, but I think that the message is quite clear. Mel Gibson was trying to get across to the general public the abuse, pain and suffering that this man went through for all man kind (depending on your beliefs. This movie is not strictly for Catholics / Christians.
-
-
-
It is not strictly for Christains....no, but if you were raised in the gulit smothering catholic religion, then you know the story, and if you know the story then you can easily relate and understand it..........and feel more guilty about Christ\'s suffering for "our" sins....
-
-
-
For a point of reference, I was raised Catholic, and now I don\'t really practice any religion. I\'ve decided to learn what I can about different religions and figure out what I believe for myself.
I was floored by this film. When it ended, I sat silently through the credits, and then for a few minutes afterwards. While I\'m sure that one\'s faith would change one\'s take on the film, whether these events are true, exaggerated, or completely false doesn\'t matter to me. Amazing.
I am getting annoyed by the reviews I have read of this film. People are complaining that it\'s too violent. First of all, it is a story about somebody being crucified. I don\'t think we should be expected Julia Roberts and Hugh Grant in a romantic comedy. Second of all, the second word of the title means SUFFERING. Thus, The Passion of the Christ means The Suffering of the Christ. Jesus suffered. It\'s a fact that most religious groups and historians agree on. Regardless of whether or not the man is the son of God, he suffered tremendously. He was beaten and then crucified. Not to mention that it is rated R for "sequences of graphic violence". Deal with it or don\'t see it.
And as far as the anti-Semmetism, I don\'t see it. The Jews (in the movie) wanted to kill Jesus, and the Romans (in the movie) wanted to kill Jesus. Where is the distinction?
My recommendation: Check everything you have heard at the door, don\'t bring young children or those easily disturbed, shut off your cell phone , and see this film ASAP.
-
-
#8 Reply
Posted by
davepeck
on 03 Mar, 2004 09:26
-
though i\'m not too interested in seeing this movie, even with all the hype, i grabbed it today and will prolly watch it at some point this weekend..
-
-
-
Peck, I am assuming that you grabbed a pirated copy of the movie..... If that is, indeed, the case, I am horribly disappointed in you....
-
-
#10 Reply
Posted by
davepeck
on 03 Mar, 2004 09:42
-
heh.. sorry to disappoint you, steve-o, but it\'s the only way i\'ll give it a shot.. but if i like it, i\'d surely pick up the dvd, and probably go see it in the theatre too..
-
-
-
Man....that is rough.....Fairfield County has great matinee deals on movies before 5pm....
For all you have done to preserve the "property" of PB, I am shocked that you would be down with anything pirated....
This movie is so full of visual and audio flavor, you are doing yourself a bigger injustice by watching some bootleg crap version....
Now I dont want to go off on a rant here, cause I dont necessarily live by and withing all Laws.....but when it comes to art, and artistic visions, wouldn\'t you be doing yourself a favor, by seeing the picture the way the director intended it to be seen?
If you can go through your sacraments, especially communion > confirmation, you can cough up the scratch to go see this in the theatre....
-
-
#12 Reply
Posted by
Yoda
on 03 Mar, 2004 10:16
-
I\'d throw down a couple bucks for a copy of the flick.
Steve,
I disagree with you on pirated stuff. I get agravated when I see commercials with some LOTR characters and others saying that it is talking money away from them and from the industry when they themselves are making a load of money to do something that they enjoy. Maybe not for this movie since it was done on such a small budget, but I think it\'s time for actors to stop playing the poverty card unless they themselves are making scale wages.
I personally just got a copy of ROTK and Big Fish (both movies that I payed $9.00 to see) because I don\'t feel like waiting 6 months or paying another $9.00 to see it again. That\'s just my personal preference.
-
-
-
Its not the actors....Its the small people who work behind the scenes that are getting the royal screw job....who dont make the big hollywood dollars.......
Not to mentinon the quality...
To each his own....is fair indeed.
-
-
#14 Reply
Posted by
davepeck
on 03 Mar, 2004 10:59
-
steve-o - i agree with you more than you know..
i\'m not your normal pirate. sure, i have access to pirate every movie known to man, but i don\'t. tPotC is a film that i really have no interest in seeing, other than for the hype-factor. awe-inspiring visuals and sound effects, while good, do not sell me on a movie. content does. as i said, if i\'m pleased with the content of this movie, i will
gladly go see it in the theatre, AND buy the dvd (though it\'s likely that i\'ll buy the dvd anyways - those who have seen my collection know this). by the same token, if i
don\'t like the content, and find out 45 minutes into the movie that it\'s not for me, i like having the option of turning it off, and rewatching season 4 of the sopranos in preparation for the premiere of season 5 this sunday.
grand theft auto 3: playstation2 - hadn\'t played video games in a while. heard a lot of hype about this game. downloaded it, played it for 2 days straight, loved it. went out the next day and dropped my $50 on it. since then, i\'ve bought GTA3 for xbox as well, plus GTA: Vice City for ps2 and xbox. all this would not have been done if i hadn\'t originally downloaded the game. i loved it, and i supported it.
LOTR:TTT - i had a crystal clear 5.1 screener DVD a week after it came out in theatres. i saw it in the theatre twice, bought the 2-disc dvd in august, and the 5-disc collector\'s gift set in november. sure, i\'m a big LOTR fan, but still.. i didn\'t settle on the screener dvd, i bought the real thing when it became available..
-