worse than even I thought

[cwsox]

there is nothing here that I want to associate myself with as a Christian - nothing

 

I ran into another pastor in line at the theatre - we both agreed that

we needed to see it in self defense since it is The Issue today - he and

his wife and I sat together - I don't know which one of us went numb

first from shock that this movie is as unBiblical is it is - you think

driving a nail through someone's hand would gross you out but like a

porn film, when you've seen 18,000 blow jobs the 18,001st is boring and

numbing -

 

if you had a drinking game, had a drink every time the script

actually says something from the Gospels or portrays something in a

Gospel, you'd be stone sober at the end of the movie -

 

the three of us

sat and watched the credits to look for one theologian, one Biblical

scholar that credit was given to and as we suspected, there was none -

 

but they do thank the Legionnaires of Christ and that is not a positive

thing

 

if this is the Jesus you need, I am glad you got it but there is nothing

here that I want to associate myself with as a Christian - nothing

 

let this fad pass quickly

 

I am being kind by the way, because I'd rip this movie every which way,

anti-Semitic and unBiblical - that lack of Biblical fidelity surprised

even me (I loved it when everyone speaks Latin when in fact that

dialogue would have been in koine Greek -

 

but I hated the nonBiblical dialogue that dominated the script placed all the blame on those hooked nosed Jews and took Rome right off the hook)

 

I have gone to many movies that I thought I would dislike and been won

over but this one was the most mind numbing sick thing - if that's what you

need to love Jesus - that is scary

 

considering Gibson's fetish with torture/violence in Mad Max and

Braveheart, this still went further than I expected and had less and

less meaning as it went on - only Gibson would think the whipping scene

in the Gospels didn't have enough violence - count - this is almost a

Bible denying movie

 

but for fans of Anne Catherine Emmerich and stigmatas, it is a blood

festival

 

this movie has a political agenda and that was clear - it is a promo for the Pius X Society - not a good thing in my view - the anti Semitism of the 19th century mystic stigmatists was both very clear and carefully choreographed - the most antiSemitic part of thge script is the false words they put in Pilate's mouth and the attempt to whitewash Rome over the embarrassment that Rome did this was cinematically clever but disgusting

 

there is nothing here that I want to associate myself with as a

Christian - nothing

 

I can love Jesus without the orgasms of violence - it scares me that some

people need that

 

be thankful that I am not going point by point through this movie - it is so unBiblical -

 

reminds me of a time I looked at a flashy car and I know nithing about cars and I said to a mechanic what a cool car it was and he told me it was junk -

 

this slow plodding sick film is not based on the Gospels - it looks like it is but it was stunning how it wasn't -

 

there was more Gospel and truth in Kangaroo Jack

 

BrandoFan - you may note that the suicide of Judas visually and the entire Jesus before Herod scenes are directly ripped out of Jesus Christ Superstar -

 

and JC Superstar, Godspell, far more effective at conveying the Passion and certainly the Resurrection than this thing

[FlaSoxxJim]

I appended my thoughts to your post of this in the extant Mel thread, but again, many thanks for toughing it out and sitting through it, and for sharing with us your expertise in the field to point out just how non-historical/non-Biblical this film actually is. Whether or not anybody gets that is an entirely different matter...

[baggio202]

cw..i wonder because of your extensive biblical studies that maybe you missed the point being caught up in all the innacuracies....maybe the movie isnt meant for someone who already is really giving their life to the lord...maybe its for guys like me who are struggling everyday to get to a point where we can put God's wishes ahead of our own...seeing the passion depicted so graphically might be a motivator for alot of us...

[Mathew]

Don't care either way, but thanks for some cannon fodder when the subject comes up, I do respect your opinion in the highest regard.

[HighHeat45]

there was more Gospel and truth in Kangaroo Jack

 

[DBAHO]

And that's sayin sumthin cos that movie was absolutely awful. And that's comin from an Aussie.

[FlaSoxxJim]

And that's sayin sumthin cos that movie was absolutely awful. And that's comin from an Aussie. 

But in the Kangaroo jack Last Supper scene, they at least get it right and eat unleavened bread, right?

[cwsox]

cw..i wonder because of your extensive biblical studies that maybe you missed the point being caught up in all the innacuracies....maybe the movie isnt meant for  someone who already is really giving their life to the lord...maybe its for guys like me who are struggling everyday to get to a point where we can put God's wishes ahead of our own...seeing the passion depicted so graphically might be a motivator for alot of us...

graphic violence I am not at problem with if the material jusifies and this matierial does but the lack of Gospel message other than disjointed flashbacks which only speak of death rather than Gospel leaves us with nothing but violence - none of the flashback set up scenes place any content on what we are seing - this is an S&M movie - if you bring a lot of your own knowledge into this it may work but the audience I saw it with, other than my clergy buddy and his wife, were almost all members of a local congregation that would be perhaps one like you belong to and I was curious that they were not moved, unmoved - it was just too much speciasl effects S&M graphics with no explanation as to why -

 

the movie begins in a way that lost me, Jesus killing - I understand the symbolism they were going for but the last thing that I think Jesus would do is to kill and that undercuts a whole context of the passion - to tranpose a scene not in the Gradon into the Graden is one thing but Jesus triumphed over the situation with faith and words, not with killing - and that began the nonBiblical mateiral

 

we all know crucifixion was the most vicious Roman execution method - the point is what does it mean - there is no teaching of atonement - all it is, is vicious Jews want to kill this guy with no motive, just want tio kill him - noble Romans blanche at the thought but every Roman realizes this is wrong while almost every Jew other than Mary, John, Magdalene, and Simon of Cyrene (who no context is goven to as a character) rejoices all the way through -

 

to me, in Jesus Christ Superstar the prayer in the Garden sets up the human cost to Jesus that Gibson's movie fails to do - and in Superstar it cuts away to show us a series of crucifixon paintings by great artists - that sequence removes to me very moving and effective - plus of course JCSuperstar makes a strong statement on the resurrection which is the a burst of life after the crucifixion and then the movie ends with every character pausing to look at the cross and ponder its meaning -

 

this mvie ends with an almost afterthought special effect on resurrection that focuses on stigmata and then before there is a nano second to reflect on the meaning of what one has seen there it is, the words MEL GIBSON flashing on the screeen

 

in Godspell, Jesus is taken away and we see no crucifixion but the disciples' reaction conveys that something horrific has happened (and also ends with a strong statement on resurrection that you walk away singing rtaher than being numb)

 

too much special effects is too much - at the end the violence is so unmoving that Jesus' body might as well ahve been from Ghostbusters and slimed by a strawberry jelly busmarck all covered with goo - pardon the pun but the overkill did not work for giving meaning-

 

the current New Yorker has a great review better than I can express it

[baggio202]

graphic violence I am not at problem with if the material jusifies and this matierial does but the lack of Gospel message other than disjointed flashbacks which only speak of death rather than Gospel leaves us with nothing but violence - none of the flashback set up scenes place any content on what we are seing - this is an S&M movie - if you bring a lot of your own knowledge into this it may work but the audience I saw it with, other than my clergy buddy and his wife, were almost all members of a local congregation that would be perhaps one like you belong to and I was curious that they were not moved, unmoved - it was just too much speciasl effects S&M graphics with no explanation as to why -

 

the movie begins in a way that lost me, Jesus killing - I understand the symbolism they were going for but the last thing that I think Jesus would do is to kill and that undercuts a whole context of the passion - to tranpose a scene not in the Gradon into the Graden is one thing but Jesus triumphed over the situation with faith and words, not with killing - and that began the nonBiblical mateiral

 

we all know crucifixion was the most vicious Roman execution method - the point is what does it mean - there is no teaching of atonement - all it is, is vicious Jews want to kill this guy with no motive, just want tio kill him - noble Romans blanche at the thought but every Roman realizes this is wrong while almost every Jew other than Mary, John, Magdalene, and Simon of Cyrene (who no context is goven to as a character) rejoices all the way through -

 

to me, in Jesus Christ Superstar the prayer in the Garden sets up the human cost to Jesus that Gibson's movie fails to do - and in Superstar it cuts away to show us a series of crucifixon paintings by great artists - that sequence removes to me very moving and effective - plus of course JCSuperstar makes a strong statement on the resurrection which is the a burst of life after the crucifixion and then the movie ends with every character pausing to look at the cross and ponder its meaning -

 

this mvie ends with an almost afterthought special effect on resurrection that focuses on stigmata and then before there is a nano second to reflect on the meaning of what one has seen there it is, the words MEL GIBSON flashing on the screeen

 

in Godspell, Jesus is taken away and we see no crucifixion but the disciples' reaction conveys that something horrific has happened (and also ends with a strong statement on resurrection that you walk away singing rtaher than being numb)

 

too much special effects is too much - at the end the violence is so unmoving that Jesus' body might as well ahve been from Ghostbusters and slimed by a strawberry jelly busmarck all covered with goo - pardon the pun but the overkill did not work for giving meaning-

 

the current New Yorker has a great review better than I can express it

i think the point you are missing....this isnt a story about jesus life and his teachings...its about the final hours of his life...thats it...nothing more...its about the pain and suffering he endured for all mankind...a suffering that at any time he could have called off and said enough...this is not worth it...i believe that was the set up in gesthsemene...the devil tempting jesus by saying no man could endure all that...putting the seed in his head that no one would condemn him for not carrying out this command from God...that it was too much for any man to bear...thats the central theme through all the violence..

 

then we watched the horror of what christ went through...and every so often we see the devil to remind of that first scene to keep bringing home the point that Jesus could have stopped this punishment at any time...

 

as far as the ressurection goes i think the movie would have had a better impact if it didnt show any of the ressuction...i think it should have ended with jesus on the cross right after he died just staring at us as the camera zoomed out...it would have had a far more lasting effect imo...

 

i believe what you were looking for from the movie was not its intent...i think the flashback scenes were there to give depth to the other characters...especially mary...they were used to show a mother's love for her son...it wasnt about Christ himself...about His teaching...it was about what he endured for all of us...it had to be that violent...to drive the point home...

 

this is definately a movie you need to see with someone who has some real insight..a mentor...or a group of friends...after seeing it i realy need to talk about it...my friend and i spent about 2 hours at denny's talking about it...

 

im sorry that this movie had such a negative effect on you cw...i guess we look at things so differently...but you really challenge me and for that i thank you...ill pray that whatever questions you get asked by your congregation , which im sure will be many , that God grants you the wisdom you need...especially for those that saw the movie the way you did and are deeply disturbed...you can be a great comfort to them...i know you wernt planning to see it but im glad you did..

[HuskyCaucasian]

i think the point you are missing....this isnt a story about jesus life and his teachings...its about the final hours of his life...thats it...nothing more...its about the pain and suffering he endured for all mankind...a suffering that at any time he could have called off and said enough...this is not worth it...

I think that really is why Mel mad this movie. Let's face it, in our society today, we do not know what Jesus really wnet though. It is almosy kind of shrugged off. "Oh yea. He died. He died to forgive out sins. THanks Jesus". We say that while not really understanding WHAT exactly he went though. We live in a world where you flick a switch and the criminal dies within seconds. What Jesus went though was far more than we could have imagined. His death would be ruled "cruel and unusual punishment" by todays standard. THis movie, I believe, gives us the referance as to what he went though. NOW we understand. Was it 100% accurate? no. But we get the idea.

[HuskyCaucasian]

this is definately a movie you need to see with someone who has some real insight..a mentor...or a group of friends...after seeing it i realy need to talk about it...my friend and i spent about 2 hours at denny's talking about it...

Agreed. I kind of did the same with my firends as well. And this was BEFORE I had scene it. I have no dooubt that once I have a chance to get together with all of them again, we will talk at length. My girlfriend said on the ride home after the movie, that she had "A heavy heart". What she ment was, she now truely understands what Jesus went through because of our sins. Mel accomplished what he set out to do.

[Texsox]

CW I have to hand it to you. I've spoken with four Pastors about this film, all mentioned the innaccuracies, all mentioned ways it was wrong. You, my friend, are the first to work a blow job reference into the review

 

What I am most troubled about this movie is the flack that critics receive for disliking it. If you are a lay person and mention you do not like the movie or - God forbid - you will not be seeing it, you are labeled as some heathen, part of the problem that is ruining America.

[cwsox]

1. CW I have to hand it to you. I've spoken with four Pastors about this film, all mentioned the innaccuracies, all mentioned ways it was wrong. You, my friend, are the first to work a blow job reference into the review 

 

What I am most troubled about this movie is the flack that critics receive for disliking it. If you are a lay person and mention you do not like the movie or - God forbid - you will not be seeing it, you are labeled as some heathen, part of the problem that is ruining America.

1. it's a rare talent!

 

2. I remain intensely troubled by the opening scene in which Jesus kills, indeed stomps a living thing to death. Today's Gospel Lesson was the Luke temptation narrative, in which Jesus responds with affirnmations of faith. Gibson removes the incredibly moving prayer of Jesus in the Garden and replaces it with an act of antiGospel violence done by Jess - just incredible. If Sermon on the Mount, indeed, all the teachings of Jesus say anything it is that Jesus would not have committed such an act of vicious violence (or any violence) - and the Gospel thus undercut by Gibson's fradulant act of violence that he has his Jesus commit. The problem with heathens and those who ruin America is that those to claom to be most relighious do not comprehend the Scriptural versus the antiScriptural, have replaced violence where the life and teachings of Jesus are, and think that is a witness.

 

The Golden Calf still is worshipped Texsox. And so they spoke badly of the prophets and the faithful before you.

 

Thnak you for sharing about the other clergy you have spoken to on this, and what they said. It is encouraging to know part of the Church is speaking against this, or at least, telling the truth about it and have been co-opted by the hype and the marketing ploys offered to congregations.

[HuskyCaucasian]

1. it's a rare talent!

 

I remain intensely troubled by the opening scene in which Jesus kills, indeed stomps a living thing to death.

 

"Cursed are you above all the livestock

and all the wild animals!

You will crawl on your belly

and you will eat dust

all the days of your life.

15 And I will put enmity

between you and the woman,

and between your offspring and hers;

he will crush your head,

and you will strike his heel."

 

Note: The "living thing" you are talking about is THE DEVIL! You should just let it live? Yea, I for one would love to see the devil live. I dont knwo about you.

[bjmarte]

"Cursed are you above all the livestock

and all the wild animals!

You will crawl on your belly

and you will eat dust

all the days of your life.

15 And I will put enmity

between you and the woman,

and between your offspring and hers;

he will crush your head,

and you will strike his heel."

 

Note: The "living thing" you are talking about is THE DEVIL! You should just let it live? Yea, I for one would love to see the devil live. I dont knwo about you.

It seemed pretty clear to me in the context of the movie that Jesus crushing the head of the serpent was symbolism for him crushing the doubts put in his head by satan.

[HuskyCaucasian]

It seemed pretty clear to me in the context of the movie that Jesus crushing the head of the serpent was symbolism for him crushing the doubts put in his head by satan.

exactly. And a glimps of his defeat of Satan.

 

And if anyone thinks it was just a snake, notice that in one of the close-ups of Satan you see the tail of the snake breifly come ot of Satan's nose. It actually looked like a snot ball, but it was a tail. Then they pan down and you see the snake. So it wasnt "just a snake". It was an embodyment of Satan.

[cwsox]

so Mel has to add an action that violates the teachings of Jesus because Matthew, Mark, Luke and John didn't have the insight of Mel?

 

 

to do that with integrity, the movie should never have suggested it was a historical account, the ad campaign lies by claiming authenticity when it adds this and so much other fanciful nonBiblical stuff

[HuskyCaucasian]

so Mel has to add an action that violates the teachings of Jesus because Matthew, Mark, Luke and John didn't have the insight of Mel?

 

 

to do that with integrity, the movie should never have suggested it was a historical account, the ad campaign lies by claiming authenticity when it adds this and so much other fanciful nonBiblical stuff

 

 

Listen, i respect your opinion. you are entitled to that. But, I think you really need to just relax. If YOU want to make a biblically and historically accurate movie, GO DO IT! Take it word for word from the bible. No extra. No Interpretation. I dare you. My bet is it doesn’t make more than $200.

 

Listen, I have read all 4 gospels (the parts that pertain to the movie) since I went to see the movie and I find it to be very accurate. Is it 100% correct? No. Did he add scenes? Yes. BUT, if he hadn’t, the movie would have been a flop. If you combine all 4 gospels of this story into one movie, it would last at best an HOUR and be very dry. What Mel added just expanded on things that ARE in the bible, but while they may be important, they are glossed over.

 

For this, I site the example of Pilot’s wife. In the bible she is mentioned once (in regards to her dream). Mel added a few scenes that expanded on the idea that she was troubled and did not want Jesus killed. Just because Mel added a few scenes with her doesn’t mean he made the movie “ubBiblical” as you claim. He just expanded on an idea with other parts. I see nothing wrong with that. If Mel changed the ending and Jesus said, “You know what, I do have the power, so I am going to save myself and take myself of this cross”, then I would have a huge problem. But in general, this was a GREAT movie with tremendous witnessing potential. In a conversation I had with my pastor, he PRAISED the movie and really wants everyone to go see it. He didn’t say the whole movie was 100% dead on, but he knows that this movie gets the message of Christ across in a forum where million upon millions can be reached. Maybe some for the first time. I, for one, fully support this movie.

[FlaSoxxJim]

Just because Mel added a few scenes with her doesn’t mean he made the movie “ubBiblical” as you claim. He just expanded on an idea with other parts. I see nothing wrong with that.

I realize your post was not directed at a general audience, but I wanted to quickly chime in. In a world where so many things are not cut-and-dried, it seems like this is something that actually is. Taking events from the Bible and then adding material that is not contained anywhere in that original source DOES, by definition, make it unBiblical.

 

Such embelishments can certainly be done with integrity so that the derived work can be true to the spirit of the original (and ongoing discussions of this film suggest the verdict is still out on whether this is the case in this instance). But, it would still be unBiblical because artistic license has been taken with what did come from a fusion of the four Gospels, and then other material from other sources and from the screenwriters has been added to that.