| Author | Message | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 173 Registered: 7-2003 |
My pastor forwarded a couple of interesting reviews on Mel Gibson's film depicting the passion. I thought they were good and would pass them along. Sorry they're so long.... Paul Harvey Comments on "The Passion" by Mel Gibson The majority of the media are complaining about this movie. Now Paul Harvey tells "The rest of the story" and David Limbaugh praises Gibson. Most people would wait and see a movie before giving the reviews that have been issued by the reporters trying to tell all of us what to believe. Paul Harvey's words: I really did not know what to expect. I was thrilled to have been invited to a private viewing of Mel Gibson's film "The Passion," but I had also read all the cautious articles and spin. I grew up in a Jewish town and owe much of my own faith journey to the influence. I have a life long, deeply held aversion to anything that might even indirectly encourage any form of anti-Semitic thought, language or actions. I arrived at the private viewing for "The Passion", held in Washington DC and greeted some familiar faces. The environment was typically Washingtonian, with people greeting you with a smile but seeming to look beyond you, having an agenda beyond the words. The film was very briefly introduced, without fanfare, and then the room darkened. From the gripping opening scene in the Garden of Gethsemane, to the very human and tender portrayal of the earthly ministry of Jesus, through the betrayal, the arrest, the scourging, the way of the cross, the encounter with the thieves, the surrender on the Cross, until the final scene in the empty tomb, this was not simply a movie; it was an encounter, unlike anything I have ever experienced. In addition to being a masterpiece of film-making and an artistic triumph, "The Passion" evoked more deep reflection, sorrow and emotional reaction within me than anything since my wedding, my ordination or the birth of my children. Frankly, I will never be the same. When the film concluded, this "invitation only" gathering of "movers and shakers" in Washington, DC were shaking indeed, but this time from sobbing. I am not sure there was a dry eye in the place. The crowd that had been glad-handing before the film was now eerily silent. No one could speak because words were woefully inadequate. We had experienced a kind of art that is a rarity in life, the kind that makes heaven touch earth. One scene in the film has now been forever etched in my mind. A brutalized, wounded Jesus was soon to fall again under the weight of the cross. His mother had made her way along the Via Della Rosa. As she ran to him, she flashed back to a memory of Jesus as a child, falling in the dirt road outside of their home. Just as she reached to protect him from the fall, she was now reaching to touch his wounded adult face. Jesus looked at her with intensely probing and passionately loving eyes (and at all of us through the screen) and said "Behold I make all things new." These are words taken from the last Book of the New Testament, the Book of Revelations. Suddenly, the purpose of the pain was so clear and the wounds, that earlier in the film had been so difficult to see in His face, His back, indeed all over His body, became intensely beautiful. They had been borne voluntarily for love. At the end of the film, after we had all had a chance to recover, a question and answer period ensued. The unanimous praise for the film, from a rather diverse crowd, was as astounding as the compliments were effusive. The questions included the one question that seems to follow this film, even though it has not yet even been released. "Why is this film considered by some to be "anti-Semitic?" Frankly, having now experienced (you do not "view" this film) "the Passion" it is a question that is impossible to answer. A law professor whom I admire sat in front of me. He raised his hand and responded "After watching this film, I do not understand how anyone can insinuate that it even remotely presents that the Jews killed Jesus. It doesn't." He continued "It made me realize that my sins killed Jesus" I agree. There is not a scintilla of anti-Semitism to be found anywhere in this powerful film. If there were, I would be among the first to decry it. It faithfully tells the Gospel story in a dramatically beautiful, sensitive and profoundly engaging way. Those who are alleging otherwise have either not seen the film or have another agenda behind their protestations. This is not a "Christian" film, in the sense that it will appeal only to those who identify themselves as followers of Jesus Christ. It is a deeply human, beautiful story that will deeply touch all men and women. It is a profound work of art. Yes, its producer is a Catholic Christian and thankfully has remained faithful to the Gospel text; if that is no longer acceptable behavior than we are all in trouble. History demands that we remain faithful to the story and Christians have a right to tell it. After all, we believe that it is the greatest story ever told and that its message is for all men and women. The greatest right is the right to hear the truth. We would all be well advised to remember that the Gospel narratives to which "The Passion" is so faithful were written by Jewish men who followed a Jewish Rabbi whose life and teaching have forever changed the history of the world. The problem is not the message but those who have distorted it and used it for hate rather than love. The solution is not to censor the message, but rather to promote the kind of gift of love that is Mel Gibson's filmmaking masterpiece, "The Passion." It should be seen by as many people as possible. I intend to do everything I can to make sure that is the case. I am passionate about "The Passion." You will be as well. Don't miss it! This is a commentary by DAVID LIMBAUGH about Mel Gibson's very controversial movie regarding Christ's crucifixion. It, too, is well worth reading. MEL GIBSON'S passion for "THE PASSION" How ironic that when a movie producer takes artistic license with historical events, he is lionized as artistic, creative and brilliant, but when another takes special care to be true to the real-life story, he is vilified. Actor-producer Mel Gibson is discovering these truths the hard way as he is having difficulty finding a United States studio or distributor for his upcoming film, "The Passion," which depicts the last 12 hours of the life of Jesus Christ. Gibson CO-wrote the script and financed, directed and produced the movie. For the script, he and his co-author relied on the New Testament Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, as well as the diaries of St. Anne Catherine Emmerich (1774-1824) and Mary of Agreda's "The City of God." Gibson doesn't want this to be like other sterilized religious epics. "I'm trying to access the story on a very personal level and trying to be very real about it." So committed to realistically portraying what many would consider the most important half-day in the history of the universe, Gibson even shot the film in the Aramaic language of the period. In response to objections that viewers will not be able to understand that language, Gibson said, "Hopefully, I'll be able to transcend the language barriers with my visual storytelling; if I fail, I fail, but at least it'll be a monumental failure." To further insure the accuracy of the work, Gibson has enlisted the counsel of pastors and theologians, and has received rave reviews. Don Hodel, president of Focus on the Family, said, "I was very impressed. The movie is historically and theologically accurate." Ted Haggard, pastor of New Life Church in Colorado Springs, Colo., and president of the National Evangelical Association, glowed: "It conveys, more accurately than any other film, who Jesus was." During the filming, Gibson, a devout Catholic, attended Mass every morning because "we had to be squeaky clean just working on this." From Gibson's perspective, this movie is not about Mel Gibson. It's bigger than he is. "I'm not a preacher, and I'm not a pastor," he said. "But I really feel my career was leading me to make this. The Holy Ghost was working through me on this film, and I was just directing traffic. I hope the film has the power to evangelize." Even before the release of the movie, scheduled for March 2004, Gibson is getting his wish. "Everyone who worked on this movie was changed. There were agnostics and Muslims on set converting to Christianity...[and] people being healed of diseases." Gibson wants people to understand through the movie, if they don't already, the incalculable influence Christ has had on the world. And he grasps that Christ is controversial precisely because of WHO HE IS - GOD incarnate. "And that's the point of my film really, to show all that turmoil around him politically and with religious leaders and the people, all because He is Who He is." Gibson is beginning to experience first hand just how controversial Christ is. Critics have not only speciously challenged the movie's authenticity, but have charged that it is disparaging to Jews, which Gibson vehemently denies. "This is not a Christian vs. Jewish thing. '[Jesus] came into the world, and it knew him not.' Looking at Christ's crucifixion, I look first at my own culpability in that." Jesuit Father William J. Fulco, who translated the script into Aramaic and Latin, said he saw no hint of anti-Semitism in the movie. Fulco added, "I would be aghast at any suggestion that Mel Gibson is anti-Semitic." Nevertheless, certain groups and some in the mainstream press have been very critical of Gibson's "Passion." The New York Post's Andrea Peyser chided him: "There is still time, Mel, to tell the truth." Boston Globe columnist James Carroll denounced Gibson's literal reading of the biblical accounts. "Even a faithful repetition of the Gospel stories of the death of Jesus can do damage exactly because those sacred texts themselves carry the virus of Jew hatred," wrote Carroll. A group of Jewish and Christian academics has issued an 18-page report slamming all aspects of the film, including its undue emphasis on Christ's passion rather than "a broader vision." The report disapproves of the movie's treatment of Christ's passion as historical fact. The moral is that if you want the popular culture to laud your work on Christ, make sure it either depicts Him as a homosexual or as an everyday sinner with no particular redeeming value (literally). In our anti-Christian culture, the blasphemous "The Last Temptation of Christ" is celebrated and "The Passion" is condemned. But if this movie continues to affect people the way it is now, no amount of cultural opposition will suppress its force and its positive impact on lives everywhere. Mel Gibson is a model of faith and courage Please copy this and send it on to all your friends to let them know about this film so that we'll all go see it when it comes out. If God calls you to it . . . God will bring you through it! | ||
| Leigh Registered user Username: Leigh Post Number: 48 Registered: 2-2003 |
The pastor at the church we are attending has highly recommended the movie. He said there is a scene in the movie were the nails are being driven into the hands of Jesus by a Roman soldier. All you can see of the soldier is his hands. The pastor said that the hands of the soldier are Mel Gibson's hands. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 42 Registered: 12-2003 |
Our pastor also highly recommended the movie. He also said it was about Jesus, not the Jews. It's message was clearly Jesus. I'm both looking forward to and dreading seeing it. The horror of the crucifixion, I've heard, is chilling. Praise God for bringing about things like this movie in His own time that will bring people face-to-face with the question, "What will I do with Jesus?" Colleen | ||
| Doug222 Registered user Username: Doug222 Post Number: 446 Registered: 3-2001 |
When is the movie supposed to come out? Doug | ||
| Thomas1 Registered user Username: Thomas1 Post Number: 93 Registered: 4-2002 |
I have heard it will be out in the Easter season. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 43 Registered: 12-2003 |
I heard at church that it's coming out in February. I guess we'll just have to watch for it! Colleen | ||
| Hallanvaara Registered user Username: Hallanvaara Post Number: 5 Registered: 1-2004 |
It¥s released US 25.2.2004. Lucky you....I suppose we have it here maybe summer..or autumn. Here are the official websites: http://www.passion-movie.com/english/index.html I really look forward to see it. Tuija | ||
| Doug222 Registered user Username: Doug222 Post Number: 464 Registered: 3-2001 |
This week, my church showed trailers of the movie and announced that they have rented a movie theater on Tuesday, February 24th--the day before the movie is to open. They have also purchased 3,000 tickets (three separate showings). They are selling them to church members for $10 each. The stipulation is that you have to buy a minimum of two. The idea is that people would bring their non-believing friends to see it. I am not sure, but given one of our teching pastors' personality, there will likely be a gospel presentation and an invitation offered at the conclusion. I am really looking forward to the movie. I have heard so much about it. I'll let you know about the response. In His Grace Doug | ||
| Hoytster Registered user Username: Hoytster Post Number: 41 Registered: 9-2003 |
I'm troubled by the R rating, for scenes of graphic violence. I put realistic movie violence in the same category as pornography: both are powerful visual experiences that distort the mind, a negative impact that is difficult to overcome. From a review: The arrest, the scourging and the Crucifixion are depicted in harsh, explicit detail in the R-rated movie. One of Jesus' eyes is swollen shut from his first beating as he is dragged from Gethsemane; the Roman torture, the long path to Golgotha bearing the wooden cross, and the nailing of Jesus' hands and feet to the beams are filmed unsparingly. The effect of the violence is at first shocking, then numbing, and finally reaches a point where many viewers may spend as much time clinically wondering how any man could have survived such beatings as they do sympathizing with his plight. I'll pass, I think. The full review: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/click/movie-1129941/reviews.php?critic=all&sortby=default&page=1&rid=1249200 - Hoytster | ||
| Hoytster Registered user Username: Hoytster Post Number: 42 Registered: 9-2003 |
I forgot to mention a line from another reviewer: "If you've seen the last half-hour of Braveheart, you've seen this movie." If you didn't see Braveheart (not recommended), that last half hour features Gibson being tortured. Not my idea of a good time. I also fear acts of anti-Semitism as a reult of this movie. Though Gibson and various authorities, including rabbis, have said that the movie disparages the temple leaders, as opposed to Jews generally... I believe that there are many who will fail to make that distinction, or simply won't care. Look for attacks on synagogues in the U.S., worse in Germany. I'll be interested in reading your opinions, if you see the movie. - Hoytster | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 191 Registered: 7-2003 |
My church also purchased a theater of seats and they sold out really quickly...so they're looking at more seats. We are planning a gospel outreach and if you do in fact bring your unsaved friends, the church is discounting the tickets to $5 each. I've heard some really positive things about the movie too. Gibson is on primetime Monday night to talk about the movie. I've heard it's accurate to the Biblical account of the story, and I would anticipate it to be rough to see. But I would be disappointed to see the cross seem too dressed up and "easy" for lack of a better word. I've got concerns about taking my 11 year old. I read Michael and Debbie Smiths commentary about the movie. They had seen it two times and recommended the movie. They said their 11 year old turned her eyes away a couple of times, but got a lot out of it otherwise. As far as the anti-Semitism, I've heard the Jews blamed for Christ's death long before this movie (even though Jesus said he laid down his life, it wasn't taken from him). Fact is the Jews did what God knew they would. As did the Romans. Anyone who blames the death of Christ on anyone other than themselves and their own sin really doesn't get it. But how do you do a movie or a play about Christ and not talk about his roots? Fact is he was a jew. Fact is he was crucified... I want to see the movie (haven't seen braveheart) because I've heard good things about it. I hope it really does have the story right. | ||
| Colleentinker Registered user Username: Colleentinker Post Number: 69 Registered: 12-2003 |
Our pastor saw the movie, and he said the violence IS graphic, but he also said it is really accurate and represents the truth of what happened. He also said that he would not discourage parents from taking their children, because that inhuman violence is actually what Jesus experienced, and he did it for us. Since Gibson appears to be sticking closely to the gospel accounts, I can't see how this movie could evoke anti-Semitism unless people want to see it that way. I read a long report of the movie in Newsweek last night, and I was really struck by the author's clear disregard for the accuracy of the Bible. The fact that the Jews are depicted as an angry mob begging Pilate to crucify him annoyed the writer, and he saw that as an innacurate portrayal of history. Rome, he asserted, had the power to effect capital punishment, not the Jews. What the writer and other critics miss, however, it the spiritual reality that had its roots in the story of Israel. While the Jews could not kill Jesus legally, still they were the ones who should have known who he was. They held the prophecies and the law, and of all people they should have welcomed him. Instead, they rejected him, even with the prophecies as part of their heritage. The Romans had not historical reason to know who he was.. Hence, the Gospels portray the treachery of the Jewish leaders rejecting Jesus after seeing all the evidence that he was the promised Messiah. Such a protrayal, however, does not condemn all Jews, merely the Jewish leaders at that time. No one who understands the gospel could see that movie as anit-Semitic, I believe. Jesus has always divided people: those who believe, and those who don't. Those who don't cannot see the spiritual reality that the Bible teaches, including God's appointment of the Jews, the significance of the Jewish leaders rejecting him, Jesus' repeated appeals to them to honor God, and God's opening a living way for ALL people to get to the Father by means of his blood and agony on the cross. One interesting aside was a short interview with the actor who plays Jesus in the movie. (I can't remember his name.) The interviewer asked him if playing Jesus increased his faith. His response was, Absolutely. The actor is Catholic, and he said that the hardest thing about playing the role was the literal physical pain. He said, I love Jesus more than anything. I love Him more than my wife; I love Him more than my children. He also said he wanted people NOT to see him; he wanted them only to see Jesus Christ as they watch the movie. I'm looking forward to seeing the movie, although I do dread the graphic portrayal. I believe, though, that truth is never "pretty" because it reveals not only the pleasant things but also the reality of evil. As Mel Gibson is quoted as saying, It was my sins that put Him there. Colleen | ||
| Chris Registered user Username: Chris Post Number: 214 Registered: 7-2003 |
It is completely beyond me how anyone could call a movie, where the hero is a Jewish man and all his followers and supporters are also Jewish men and women, an anti-semitic movie. The fact that His detractors and enemies also happened to include Jewish people shouldn't detract from the fact that Jesus of Nazareth was himself thoroughly Jewish. It's like making a movie about the American Civil War and then worrying that it will cause hatered of Americans. The Gospel story is a story about Jewish characters, that's set in the first century Jewish state, written primarily by Jewish writers. If I may use another simile, it's like calling the works of Homer "anti-Greek". I can't see a way that you could tell the story of Jesus factually and at the same time completely absolve all the power brokers in 1st centery Jerusalem of any involvement in his arrest, trial, and death. The only way you could do this is to completely throw out the Biblical account and invent a story were the Romans and Romans alone were involved. Clearly this is what some would like to see happen. This might be fine if you believe the Bible account to be fiction or at best a fictionalized rendering based very loosely on obscure facts. However, if you believe the Bible to be the innerant word of God......then you tell the story the way it was written and do everything you can to convey the message that we all are responsible for the death of Christ....you, me, everyone. Chris | ||
| Hoytster Registered user Username: Hoytster Post Number: 43 Registered: 9-2003 |
The ADL is prone to find anti-semitism everywhere, I think, but here's a link nonetheless: http://www.adl.org/PresRele/ASUS_12/4444_12.htm The statement says the ADL does NOT expect a progrom as a result of the movie. I hope not! Responding to your statement, Chris: People who hate the Jews do not need a good reason to act out their hate; they just need an excuse. You may be correct, that there are no legitimate grounds for calling the movie anti-semitic. That's irrelevant for people who are already anti-semitic. They are already disposed to harm Jews. I fear they are going to go to the movie, get all aroused, and go out to raise hell. Speaking to my previously-raised concern about the violence, here's an excerpt from a Christian reviewer: "The movie, however, spends the bulk of its energies not pointing fingers or stretching arms, but pummeling flesh. The viewer is sickened not by anti-Semitism (or, for that matter, Jewish duplicity), but by the gore and grotesqueness of Roman capital punishment. We often remember that we are watching a movie by the director of Braveheart, and the gruesome brutality that movie poured onto Scottish and English armies is here funneled onto one character. As Jesus receives the thirty-nine lashes of the Roman guards, I recalled Gibsonís comment that he had been focusing on the wounds of Christ. He forces us to do the same; the scene slows the movieís pace so that we can hear flesh ripping in two, muscle pulling from bone. ìBy his stripes we are healed,î reads the oft-quoted verse, and Gibsonís movie details each and every stripe." I don't think I want that in my brain. I don't believe that our brains are very good at distinguishing between reality and the visual representations we see at the movies. The movie sounds brutalizing to me. It may have a holy purpose and a holy message. Regardless, it sounds like horrible, way extreme violence, and "True" of not, I don't want to be exposed to that. The full review: http://www.newpantagruel.com/issues/1.1/dodd.html Here's a link from the same site, that suggests the movie can be a means to bring people to Christ: http://www.newpantagruel.com/issues/1.1/stps.html#passion I look forward to hearing your comments, after you've seen the movie. Perhaps I'll go, if y'all recommend the movie. - Hoytster | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 196 Registered: 7-2003 |
The "irony" (or whatever) to me is that people used to go watch these things at all. Or hangings or any of the other awful forms of capital punishment the history books could define. In all the plays I've done through the years about the cross, I could never understand why people would go and watch. I don't care how "deserving" the person was, I still don't think I could go watch. Having said that, I am going to see the movie. Not because I don't think my eyes will be closed through parts of it, but because I want to support someone who is trying to accurately portray Christ. How many people pay money to support false presentations of Christ? The only way I think we get people's attention sometimes is how we vote with our money. | ||
| Loneviking Registered user Username: Loneviking Post Number: 216 Registered: 7-2000 |
As I've heard from several reviewers, this is not a movie you watch but one you experience. The graphic violence and the horror of the experience is what makes this movie different. We've all seen the fairly neat and sanitzed versions---now we can be reminded what the crucifiction was really like. Anyway, I'm going to support the film and see it---even though after twenty years of trauma duty in E.R.s I can visualize pretty well how the crucifiction must have been. | ||
| Sabra Registered user Username: Sabra Post Number: 32 Registered: 10-2001 |
Oh, Bacchiocchi makes me so mad! Here is his middle of the road, non-contoversial, bland summary of the Passion movie: "After reading a dozen of reviews from reporters and church leaders who were offered the opportunity to preview the The Passion, I decided to comment, not on the artistic qualities of the film which I have not seen, but on the biblical legitimacy of portraying the trial and execution of Christ in a gruesome and bloody manner. The bleeding body of Jesus shown in the few snapshot of the film shown in the TV advertisements, suggest to me that Gibson, a traditional Catholic, is influenced more by the Catholic devotion to Christ's Passion, than by the Gospels' narratives. There is no "blood" in the Passion narrative. The reason is that the Evangelists were not writing a novel for a bloodthirsty market, but were witnessing to the awesome character of Christ as revealed in the final hours of His life." Well, isn't that just like him? Let's not get too graphic on the blood! If he had any passion for anything it would startle me. | ||
| Jerry Registered user Username: Jerry Post Number: 409 Registered: 6-2002 |
Oh, really, Dr. B?
Hmmm. A "Bible scholar" who does not know the Bible. Curious, eh? | ||
| Melissa Registered user Username: Melissa Post Number: 198 Registered: 7-2003 |
Did he think the scourgings would make no impact? Leave no marks? break no skin? spill no blood? gimme a break.... | ||
| Jeannette Registered user Username: Jeannette Post Number: 12 Registered: 3-2003 |
Sabra: Where did you read Bacchiochis comment? I guess he really believes EGW's statement that Jesus' visage was not mared. Of course he's never read the statement where she contradicts herself on the subject. I don't think I can bring myself to see the movie. Just reading and imagining what my Lord and Savior went through for me turns my stomach into a huge knot. I'm hoping and praying tham my brother, sons, anf former daughter-in-law will go and be impacted in such a way that they will accept Jesus. |
