Haven't seen it yet, Hamie, so I have no comment. I'll probably be seeing it in the next few days and post something forthwith.
David
David, what are your thoughts about this film? Do you think mel Gibson may have gone too far or possibly flipped his marbles? Or do you think this could be an accurate portrayal of what happened to Christ?
Jamie
Haven't seen it yet, Hamie, so I have no comment. I'll probably be seeing it in the next few days and post something forthwith.
David
I have never seen so many critics disagree on a movie before. Has anyone seen this yet?
HAW-HA! I was thinking of doing the same thing on my board; discussing/critiquing a movie just based upon reviewers comments, then really watching it myself to post MY views.
THIS movie has gotten so much press (believe the Mel Gibson name is perhaps the only cause), it's one I'll HAVE to watch in a theatre. And despite what Rocky may tell you, am a nihilist. "Dogma" had some very intelligent writing, though... [img]tongue.gif[/img]
I loved "Dogma!" [img]graemlins/dog.gif[/img]
What am I telling people? [img]graemlins/chat.gif[/img]
I don't even know what nihilist means! [img]graemlins/wonder.gif[/img]
???!!!???
here's a bit from People Magazine's online coverage -
Is "Passion" historically accurate?
Experts quibble with some of the details: For instance, Greek, not Latin, was the prevalent tongue in the eastern parts of the Roman Empire at the time. A bigger problem for historians: While little of Jesus' life is in the historical record, we do know a lot about the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate. "Not nice," says John Dominic Crossan, a former priest and author of Who Killed Jesus? Gibson's Pilate is a thoughtful, even compassionate leader who orders Jesus' death only under pressure from the Jewish high priests. But history shows the Jews were wholly subordinate to Pilate, a sadist who routinely crucified people without trial. In The Passion, says Crossan, "the Roman authority comes off smelling like a rose." Gibson differs. "I don't think there is a better history than [the Gospels]," he says. "To suddenly find some other revisionist story is an insult, quite frankly. To me, these are rock solid."
<font color="#007FFF" size="1">[ February 26, 2004 06:36 PM: Message edited by: rocketmaster ]</font>
I think it's really incumbent on everyone to see it! Not that I'm in agreement with the interpretation, but it's necessary to know who ones friends are as well as ones enemies. Revisionist! Phooey! There are many interpretations of the Christ Myth, beginning with the gospels...but they are not Gospel! The first wasn't even written until 70 years after Jesus's death and Masada had already happened...What about Masada? Verified...Pontius Pilote was indeed a sadist, at least according to Heroditus. The Dead Sea Scrolls say different, the Gnostic Gospels say different and the Champions of Christianity during the Crusades...The Knights Templar, also say different. So, who is to say? We don't have any record of his death, only hearsay and their is evidence in the vaults of the Priory du Zion that he may have survived settled somewhere in the south of what was then Gaul and his offspring the progenators of the Merovingian dynasty. The Cathars if you will. Many different theories, so revisionist be damned. But I'll see it, because I need to. Oh! One more thing...How can a total maybe 30 million Jews have such a profound influence on the world and be so villified for something they had really no control over. The Sanhedrin made the decision on the basis of wanting to keep the status quo. They didn't want a revolutionary on their hands at a time when they were so oppressed by the Romans. Doesn't the scenario sound familiar...Gandhi, Luther King, St Bartholomeu, I could go on forever. I'm out!
David
I haven't seen it and have no particular desire to do so. I don't mean to offend good people of sincere religious beliefs, but as someone from a sort of mixed Catholic-Protestant background who has grown to become agnostic, I had this story drummed into me before I had the power of speech, much less reasoning, and I can't imagine another filmed version of it would be anything less than anticlimactic. How many times can one see different filmed versions of the same story? Also, Gibson's ultra-coy albeit shrewd method of promoting the film kind of offends me. That and the fact that televangelists (Jim Dobson et al) and the Catholic League absolutely love it, LOVE it. Just another inducement not to see it.
Ed T.
PS- My understanding of nihilism is that it's a philosophy that contends existence is worthless and meaningless. I believe it started as a political movement in Russia in the days before the Revolution.
<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Dogma used a manner of scriptwriting which didn't place different faiths in opposition. Damn good; ideas above 'faith'. Thumbs down on being so fuckin X-ian; good vs. evil, God vs. Satan. But guess that can't be helped in the US, we wouldn't understand Ganesh or Vishnu.Originally posted by rocketmaster:
I loved "Dogma!" [img]graemlins/dog.gif[/img]
What am I telling people? [img]graemlins/chat.gif[/img]
I don't even know what nihilist means! [img]graemlins/wonder.gif[/img]
Well, you know I'm ordained, but not by which two 'churches'. Polar opposites, like Davids avatar.
[img]graemlins/wonder.gif[/img]
PHEW! So, take it Davids seen the movie AND his 'puter problems have been corrected (I noticed many fewer typos in that post than other recent posts).
Personally, may wait a few days before seeing it, as hardcore X-ians are buying tickets in droves around here.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks