Leave Mel Alone!!!

[brainwashed_youth]

Ya know, I really am getting tired of all the Gibson bashers on this site. All I gotta say is that if Martin Scorsesee can trash scripture and make a movie so offensive to many people, then Mel Gibson has the exact same right to approach scripture literally and make a movie about it.



I can't wait to see The Passion 2morrow

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. How literal is it to make Satan a woman?

Scripture refers to him as a male.

[brainwashed_youth]

10. Satan has many forms in the movie

Ya, he does. I read it in Ebert's review I think.

[not systems]

31. I saw Ebert's review on TV. I thought he might start speaking in tongues.

He had clear been overcome with religious fervor.

[brainwashed_youth]

33. so......

anything wrong with that?

[not systems]

39. Yes it is wrong.

Using the mass corporate media to whip up religious fervor
is a sign of the growing danger to our constitutional form
of government and secular society.

[TXlib]

58. Not a governmental agency

[not systems]

69. The joining of corporation and church threatens...

the secular state.

Sure ABC is not a government agency so I should not care what it does?

http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/ConstitutionRestorationAct.htm

“Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an element of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official personal capacity), by reason of that element’s or officer’s acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.”

[Blue_Chill]

76. It's not wrong

You feel threatened by religion that's your problem. I don't and it's not wrong so whatever.

[not systems]

81. I'm sure you will enjoy theocracy then.

I prefer secular democracy.

To each their own.

[Blue_Chill]

88. I'm sure I'll enjoy freedom of speech and freedom of religion

And I will continue to enjoy it no matter how threatened you are by a movie. Hypocrites everywhere bitchig up a storm about a movie!!!!! You all sound like RWers and are making me sick.

[not systems]

97. Please do enjoy it.

I am sick of turning on the TV only to see "Jesus"
dragging a damn cross around.

Mel can make his movie I'm all for it.

I find endless promotion of religion on the networks
a indication of a blending of corporations and church
that I find disturbing.

If I hear anyone describe a movie as having a "realistic"
depiction of the crucifiction again I will puke.

[Malva Zebrina]

90. I think the same

you are indeed a sober thinking person

[not systems]

99. Glad to hear it.

I thought I was the last person supporting a secular society.

[fujiyama]

107. Don't worry...

There are a few more of us left. I agree with you for the most part. I'm getting tired of all this hype. If Mel wants to make a movie about Jesus, fine. He can knock himself out. He has the money to produce it. I don't want to have to hear about it each time I turn to a news station, as though this is the biggest story going on right now.

And BTW, I never thought of the merging of corporate media with psycho religious fervor -- not at all appealing.

[Robroy]

11. Androgynous.

n/t

[ronnykmarshall]

2. Be glad to.

I wouldn't touch the homophobic bastard with a six foot pole.

[brainwashed_youth]

13. what makes you think he's homphobic

Seriously, I haven't heard him say anything of the like. I swear, some people on this board assume that just because he's a fundamentalist christian(nothing wrong with that in and of itself) ya'll think he's homphobic, jew hating, racist, and all that stuff.

[ronnykmarshall]

23. Interview several years ago.

Which of course he said:

A. Never happened
B. Was "misquoted".
C. His words were not translated correct from French to English.
D. Tried to cover his ass.


When the subject of gays came up, Gibson pointed to his ass and said "THIS is for shitting".

[brainwashed_youth]

25. eh...

I'd actually have to see the quote myself if you understand. You haven't given me anything to base my judgement on

[ronnykmarshall]

28. Fine

We agree to disagree.

[brainwashed_youth]

30. no, we don't

you can't provide proof for your accusations. How am I supposed to take you seriously when you can't provide proof? Labeling someone as a homophobe is a very serious charge and needs to be backed up....which you can't do

[ronnykmarshall]

36. YES we do.

You wanna keep this up, then fine.

I read this article several years ago. I don't have the magazine and it was before the internet. I KNOW what I read. I'm a gay man and I DON'T forget when some asshole makes a statement like that.

You want to defend him, fine. I DO NOT agree with you. As far as I am concerned there is no reason to continue this.

I wish I had a link to the quote, but I don't. Like I said this took place in the early 90's late 80's. No internet and I don't make it a habbit to save magazines or newspapers from a decade ago.

[brainwashed_youth]

42. i hope you understand

where I'm coming from. I've heard the label "homophobic" tossed around quite alot recently to anyone who doesn't agree 100% with whatver gays are talking about these days. Didn't you learn your lesson from Drudge? It's not nice(or respectable) to go around saying stuff that you can't prove and it only makes you look stupid and nobody will listen to you

[ronnykmarshall]

44. I understand what you're talking about.

But I don't need to learn any "lessons" from Drudge.

FYI- If you go a Google on "Mel Gibson Homophobe" you'll fine plenty of articles. Some are crap, but there seems to be a pattern here.

Having lived in LA for several years, I've learned that some of the "best kept secrets" are true when it comes to celebs.

[CrownPrinceBandar]

66. ronny...

the Gibson quote was in Dec 1 issue of El Pais. I can't seem to find anything linkable.

A couple of refs to said article:

http://www.qrd.org/qrd/media/people/1995/mel.gibson.antigay.history-wockner-06.02.95

and

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,111979,00.html

Not taking sides here, just like checking the facts.

[noiretextatique]

73. it's probably a lot like "sexist" and "racist"

i often wonder...is the existence racism/sexism/homophobia less problematic than accusing someone of being racist/sexist/homophobic? seems to be so...more and more.

[smirkymonkey]

79. That's funny, I 've heard

the label "Christian Basher" tossed around quite a lot recently to anyone who doesn't agree 100% with whatever Christians are talking about these days.

[Richardo]

3. Well Scorcese got KILLED in the media - Mel should pay his dues too...

If you want to be controversial, you gotta expect people to react - negatively and maybe even extremely. That's what controversy IS!

Have fun at the film - I understand it's the feel-good movie of the year.

[Mari333]

4. Ill critique anyone I please, thanks.

Including Scorsese and Mel and Bu$h and Dominionists and the Pope and Buddhists and Shintoists and Muslims and..
Its a First Amendment right. Freedom of Speech. Freedom to critique.

[GreenPartyVoter]

5. Sure he has that right

Now me, I hope someone makes a movie about my Lord that focuses on His passion for caring for the needy, giving justice to widows, orphans and aliens (immigrants). Hope they mention, too, that he likes it when we pay our taxes because they too can be used to help those in need.

And maybe they'll mention that bit about turning the other cheek?

Who knows?

[minkyboodle]

101. damn straight

maybe put in a bit about throwing the money changers out of the temple and I'll line up to see that. As for Mel, I can't judge completely as I haven't seen it but what I've read from those who have and from the man himself, I'd say he is missing the forrest for the trees (not to mention his portrayal of Pilate sounds like complete horse shit).
Scott

[GreenPartyVoter]

102. oh yeah the moneychanging in the temple scene for SURE

Bet Jesus isn't a fan of big ol' greedy modern day corporations either. *lol*

[MsUnderstood]

6. Dude, didn't he change the ending?

I mean in the bible didn't the Jewish kill Jesus? And didn't Mel have to fix his ending so as not to appear evil?

And how can you take the scriptures and turn them into 2.5 hours of dialouge?

Okay, okay, I'll leave you alone. . .

[yellowcanine]

20. No, according to the Bible the Romans did the deed.

Some Jews were complicit, yes. But then Jesus was a Jew also and his followers were Jews so saying the Jews killed him would not be very accurate as it was only some of the Jews who wanted to harm him. Most of the Jews probably had no feeling one way or the other about Jesus.

[brainwashed_youth]

22. not going to say that

the Jewish High Council were particularly saddened to see him go, but yes, it was the Romans who killed him. Want proof? The Roman form of execution was crucifixion, the Jewish form was stoning. If it was the jews fault, they would have stoned him, end of story.

[mac2]

91. According to clergy we all did....

Christ died for our sins. The Jews, the Romans, the citizens all wanted him dead. It was predestined to happen by God.

[terryg11]

7. i agree

for some reason we find his vision of a movie dangrous? Am a little confused as to why so many here can't get over the flick

[NuckinFutz]

24. You got it...

especially when they haven't even seen it yet. I haven't seen such a ruckus over a movie since 'The Last Temptation of Christ'.

Regardless of how the movie actually plays out, it has already reached the level of great art. It has managed to evoke enormous controversy and emotion, and almost nobody has even seen it yet.

All this fuss reminds me of the folks who like to blame Columbine on Marilyn Manson. Please.

How many times has the Bible been interpreted and reinterpreted? This is just another one.

Myself, I'll judge it on whatever artistic merits it may have when it finally comes to cable.

[mac2]

94. Attack my religion..you insult me.

No free speech allowed.

[sadiesworld]

8. And I thought Mel liked the feeding frenzy. Go figure.

[roughsatori]

9. Feel free to enjoy a pornographic display of violence in the name of love

I will give it to Mel, he has pulled off the publicity stunt of the year all in the name of the Lord.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[yellowcanine]

12. Are you aware Mel said he wanted Frank Rich's "intestines on a stick"?

When Frank Rich rightly criticized Mel Gibson's father for downplaying the Holocaust, Mel said, "I want to kill him. I want his intestines on a stick." Have you ever considered that this whole hoopla about the movie might be a publicity stunt on Mel's part? Mel Gibson is not a victim here.

[brainwashed_youth]

15. and why'd he say that

maybe because Rich was trying to smear Mel by going after his father? And Mel apologized for that on his interview with Diane Sawyer. What Rich did was absolutely disgusting and downright dirty. Wouldn't you be upset if someone did that to your family?

[yellowcanine]

26. I told you why he said it.

Frank Rich did not smear Mel by going after his father. Mel's father said a stupid thing - that the number of deaths during the Holocaust was exaggerated - and Rich rightly called him on it. Exactly how does one apologize for saying you want to kill someone and want their intestines on a stick? Mel Gibson has played this just the right way to make sure that lots of people go see his movie. He is not a victim. He will make millions more because of the "controversy".

[brainwashed_youth]

27. i know the story

Rich did this when the Passion was first starting to create a buzz. And even then, so what? Mel apologized. That should be enough for anyone. Besides, I can think of idiot celebrities who've said dumber stuff than that.

[LeahMira]

55. Still...

maybe because Rich was trying to smear Mel by going after his father?

A person who claims that the Holocaust wasn't all that bad after all deserves to be taken to task on his statement.

While Mel Gibson certainly need not attack his own father, he certainly could have made some statement to the effect that fathers and sons don't always agree. Instead, he chose to defend his father by verbally threatening the individual who took his father to task.

Wouldn't you be upset if someone did that to your family?

If a member of my family publicly denied or minimized the Holocaust, I would expect sensible people to object vehemently. I would be most upset at the member of my family who made such a statement.

[fujiyama]

109. Oh boo hoo...

Mel can go cry a river. He's a getting a great media promo through the media. Rich was stupid because he was adding to this and giving Mel even more free publicity....Rich did, however, have some reason to be suspicious of Mel, considering he screening the thing only for a select group of mostly fundies.

Mel and his father as well, are public figures. His dad has been very vocal saying stupid things like denying the holocaust. Fuck him.

[smirkymonkey]

80. Do you think Jesus would have

ever said that "he wanted someone's intestines on a stick?". The dissonance here is astounding.

I've always hated Mel, even before the movie, this situation has just brought out his true colors, that's all.

[stevedeshazer]

14. Nice handle

It's the most accurate thing about your post.

[Doctor Pedantic]

16. Wait a minute...

I thought The Last Temptation of Christ was incredibly profound, moving, and reverent. As a Christian, I thought that film should be required viewing among the Christian community.

I also am looking forward to The Passion of the Christ; I'm going to see it tomorrow night. People have every right to critique the movie so long as they have seen it. Uninformed condemnation is typically the province of the right-wing, and I have also been disheartened by the vitriolic attacks on this film by people who know nothing about it.

It's also important to divorce the quality of the film, and its meaning, from Mel Gibson personally. Yes, he's made outrageous homophobic statements; yes, his dad is clearly a nut-job. But the fact that Roman Polanski is a pedophile doesn't mean The Pianist wasn't a great film. In fact, Polanski got a freakin' Academy Award for his effort, meaning that plenty of people had no problem separating his artistic skills from his message. Why not do the same here?

[brainwashed_youth]

19. I agree

although I still don't know when Mel made homphobic statements

[terryg11]

52. nice post and good point

I like the Roman Polanski thing.

[LeahMira]

62. No, listen to the concerns...

I have also been disheartened by the vitriolic attacks on this film by people who know nothing about it.

You might have a point except for the fact that those among us who are Jewish know about the effects of the Passion Plays that used to take place in Europe (maybe still do?).

This film has received plenty of publicity, and now there are trailers shown on TV from time to time. I think people can get a pretty fair idea of what the film is about and how it tells its story, and I think that misgivings are perfectly sensible in the situation. I am glad to see that many non-Jewish folks also now understand the effects that a modern-day Passion Play could have and that they are concerned about its potential.

But the fact that Roman Polanski is a pedophile doesn't mean The Pianist wasn't a great film.

I don't know that Roman Polanski is a pedophile. Roman Polansky, like Charlie Chaplin and not a few others, enjoyed the company of young women. I doubt that anyone asks for a birth certificate before sex. Does not requiring proof of one's partner's age make a person a pedophile? Not in my book.

[eissa]

68. Instead of Polanski

what if it was Charlton Heston or Ah-nold that molested a 13-year old? Would anyone be as forgiving?

[Doctor Pedantic]

70. Nope.

On your first point, there's no question that people have used the Gospel to "justify" anti-Semitism and religious prosecution. And Passion plays in particular have historically fueled the fires of hatred. But we can't just assume that this particular retelling has the same purpose or will lead to the same effect. If it's a faithful depiction of Scripture, I have no problem with that; there will always be people who twist the Bible to suit their own ends. If it's unnecessarily hate-mongering and hostile towards Jews (as a people or a religion), I'll be the first to condemn it.

On your second point, Polanski had sex with a 13-year-old girl, and I guarantee you he didn't need a birth certificate to know she was underage. If someone were to have sex with my nine-year-old daughter....even if she were 13....I wouldn't chalk that up to someone just "enjoying the company of young women."

[brook]

105. Do you mean...

that you are unaware that Polanski cannot enter the US because he was adjuged a pedophile?

[PROGRESSIVE1]

18. Mel Gibson is a....

"History Revisionist"! He questions if the Houlocaust
really happened. His father outright denies that it happened and
blames the Jews for the evils of the world.

Mel Gibson and his Father are very "Goebels"!

:puke:

[brainwashed_youth]

21. jesus christ

Mel Gibson is not a holocaust denier, his father is. That's one of the dirtiest tactics I can think of, smearing someone else by going after someone close to their heart.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

29. Frank Rich rightly critisized Mel's father for his views on the.....

haulocost and Mel said that he wanted "Rich's intestines on a stick"!

:eyes:

[brainwashed_youth]

32. i know

because Mel was upset. Look, he apoligized for it and I don't think Mel is gonna harm Rich anytime soon.

[yellowcanine]

46. If someone said they wanted Mel's intestines on a stick

and then "apologized" for it, would you be so quick to dismiss it as no big deal? Of would you be outraged that they were attacking Mel Gibson? Just curious. And btw, if my father were stupid enough to say what Mel's father said I wouldn't be threatening someone who criticized him for it. This is not normal behavior, however much you try to make it so. I don't know whether the movie is any good or not. But I sure am not impressed with Mel Gibson as a person. For someone who professes to be a devout Christian, he sure has some un-Christ- like ways of interacting with people he disagrees with.

[itcfish]

37. My God

What is wrong with you people? Someone from a US radio station, with his own agenda, phoned this old man in Australia who said the Holocaust was exagerated, he never said it didnt happen. The man is an ill informed bigot. So was my father. I still loved him even if I didnt agree with him. All the people who fear that this movie will lead to more anti-semitism and were fighting its release are helping to make it everyones business to see it.

[Tinoire]

38. Mel Gibson is a "History Revisionist" who questions if the Holocaust

happened? (Btw, you really should learn how to spell that word.)

That's really rich. Got any proof Mel is a revisionist or denier?

He certainly is not, has not and never did.

Oh the outrageous lies people are reduced to telling. Too sad.

Urgh, what a despicable post.

If Mel is responsible for the sins of his father, damn it White America, I want my 40 acres and a mule!

[Tinoire]

34. Let me know what you thought of it. There are plenty of people

here wanting to see it.

I would not be the liberal I am without the Catholic Faith or the Gospels.

I am too amused to suddenly see many of my fellow liberals concerned about violence in movies. For years everyone's been saying that movies don't influence, that they're not to blame for certain things we see in society.

In almost 4 years here, I never once saw a thread, much less a post denouncing the gratuitious violence in horror movies because people are adults, freedom of expression and they can handle it.

Now, because it's the Gospels, it's a scandal. There is nothing to gain by trashing people's faith & that's too many of the attacks center on.

[eissa]

59. LOVE your post

Many here are taking part in the same tactics the rw have for years -- threatening boycotts (Disney, certain movies) based on politics, and our argument was always "if you don't like it, don't see it." That argument still holds.

And the comparison of Mel's lynching to Polanski's Oscar is so transparent.

[yellowcanine]

64. And calling what happened to Mel a "lynching" is obscene.

Lynching has a particular meaning for African Americans in this country and it is obscene to apply it to the criticism Mel Gibson received over his movie. Besides Mel has certainly given as good as he has gotten and there is every reason to believed he has fanned the flames for his own purposes. Mel is no victim here.

[eissa]

65. Ok, sorry about "lynching"

but you knew what I meant, of course.

I don't care for Mel and don't wish to see this film (too much violence for my taste). I do object to all this "outrage" which we have been so consistent in condeming in the past when it was directed at us. And the post regarding the comparison to Polanski is still valid -- how can one artist be separated from his politics, and not the other?

[yellowcanine]

72. Well, my view is that Mel planned all this as a publicity stunt

He has lashed out at critics in such a way that I have to believe that he wants a controversy to promote the movie. I think Mel is and has been stirring the pot. True the critics played along. The comparison to Polanski is not valid because Mel's alleged shortcomings as a person (notice I said alleged - homophobia, anti Jewish Catholic chauvenism, etc.) play into the subject of the movie in a way that didn't occur with The Piano. Note that there are apparently some gratuitus homosexual references in the movie (again, alleged, I haven't seen it).

[Tinoire]

71. Well hell, I'm an African American and I agree. This is a lynching

White people got lynched too you know. Canadian Methodist missionary/ school teacher William Luke & James Byrd SPRING to mind but I'll bet you never heard of them.

The flames fanned were flamed by the ADL and are still being flamed by them.

Hell, Foxman is now asking the Vatican to condemn the film. It takes real chutzpah to ask a church to ban a movie that is a realistic depiction of what they hold as the cornerstone of their faith.
Utterly ludicrous. There's your flame fanning.

Nothing obscene about saying Mel is being lynched here. Nothing at all.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-3763093,00.html

[yellowcanine]

74. Hmm - first time I've heard of somebody profiting from being lynched.

Lynched people are dead, they don't collect the receipts at the box office. Mel is no victim. He planned this and it is working out just the way he planned.

[Walt Starr]

35. My wife always says

"You must seperate the art from the artist"

She should know, here father is an artist.

I despise Mel Gibson's politics. I consider him a homophobic anti-semite. I'll never see The Passion because of this, but his other art is possibly viewable.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

40. Walt, I must agree that Mel is a "right" as they come and I would....

never see anything made by him.

I always opposed boycotting artists based on their political views
but after what the Right Wing nutcakes did to the Dixie Chicks, I
decided that I would boycott all politically conservative/right wing.
Artists. I still hold to that a year later.

However, just because you are a liberal, this does not mean that
I'll run to see every movie you make. I rarely go to the
movies. I only go if there is something I really care to see.

Mel Gibson is an evil man.

[Loonman]

41. Much ado about nothing

IMO

[leftchick]

43. The problem is, Mel did not use the Gospels literally....

An excellent review may be found here. The whole problem with Mel's version is summed up in the title....


The inspiration and love of Christ overpowered by the gore

http://www.nj.com/entertainment/ledger/index.ssf?/base/entertainment-1/1077606827125322.xml


<snip>
Of course, any retelling of the Gospels necessarily involves selection. The four Evangelists don't even agree on every point, and what one found astounding, another often didn't bother to include. Gibson and co-screenwriter Benedict Fitzgerald had to make choices.

It's what those choices might mean that troubled many people -- particularly when it was learned that Gibson's script had Caiphas, a Jewish religious leader, presiding over Jesus' condemnation and observing "His blood be on us and our children."

It did not matter that this quote appears only in Matthew (who also accuses the Jews of bribing Romans to cover up the resurrection) or even that Matthew attributes the line only to "all the people." Nor did it matter that many Jews today find that line to be anti-Semitic, and that the modern Church has warned about including it in Passion Plays.

Gibson insisted that the line would stay, and the version he has shown Christian groups has stubbornly included it. Yet the print screened for critics did not contain the "blood libel" line. It also used subtitled dialogue to stress the Jewishness of Jesus' followers, even -- awkwardly -- having Mary and Mary Magdalene quote from the Haggada.

There were other inflammatory details, though. Satan, for example, is personified as an effeminate creature, with a woman's face and a man's voice. Herod is shown camping it up in curls, attended by painted boys. Given the charges of homophobia that also have long followed Gibson, the inclusion of these images seem almost self-destructive, as if the director wanted to be attacked.

But then, perhaps he always has.

[brainwashed_youth]

45. that's a legitimate argument

Better than all this "anti-semitic" crap I've been hearing.

[chiburb]

47. How about this one?

In “The Passion of the Christ,” Mel Gibson shows little interest in celebrating the electric charge of hope and redemption that Jesus Christ brought into the world. He largely ignores Jesus’ heart-stopping eloquence, his startling ethical radicalism and personal radiance—Christ as a “paragon of vitality and poetic assertion,” as John Updike described Jesus’ character in his essay “The Gospel According to Saint Matthew.” Cecil B. De Mille had his version of Jesus’ life, Pier Paolo Pasolini and Martin Scorsese had theirs, and Gibson, of course, is free to skip over the incomparable glories of Jesus’ temperament and to devote himself, as he does, to Jesus’ pain and martyrdom in the last twelve hours of his life. As a viewer, I am equally free to say that the movie Gibson has made from his personal obsessions is a sickening death trip, a grimly unilluminating procession of treachery, beatings, blood, and agony—and to say so without indulging in “anti-Christian sentiment” (Gibson’s term for what his critics are spreading). For two hours, with only an occasional pause or gentle flashback, we watch, stupefied, as a handsome, strapping, at times half-naked young man (James Caviezel) is slowly tortured to death. Gibson is so thoroughly fixated on the scourging and crushing of Christ, and so meagrely involved in the spiritual meanings of the final hours, that he falls in danger of altering Jesus’ message of love into one of hate.

http://www.newyorker.com/critics/cinema/

[brainwashed_youth]

49. that 2

But then again I've heard the argument that the film sets out to do what Gibson meant for it to do. But, none of us will be able to pass judgment till we see it

[chiburb]

50. You're right, WE can't judge 'till we've seen...

But the reviews are in...

[brainwashed_youth]

51. and they're mixed

i've seen about half good, half bad. Oh well, I'll make my own decision

[chiburb]

53. But that isn't how you started this thread !

You defended Gibson blindly in your OP, now you say 'let's wait and see'...

[brainwashed_youth]

54. I'm against

all these idiot saying "Mel is a fundamentalist wacko" and "Mel hates Jews" when they know absolutely nothing about what they're saying. It seems all these people have passed judgement, even Mike Malloy, on the film and they haven't seen it. When we do that, we give the right ammo to use against us

[Sandpiper]

56. Mel is a fundamentalist wacko

Who believes his own wife is going to hell for not following the correct dogma. :crazy:

[Riptide]

61. I read that too...

He said his wife, who is an Episcopalian, is probably going to hell because she is not a Catholic. Then, why the hell did he marry her? How does he explain that to the 9 or so children he had with her. "Yes, Mel Jr., Mommy is going to hell. So, you better be an extreme Catholic too, or you'll be joining her there."

I couldn't care less about his movie. But, Brainwashed youth (perfect name) defense of him is way over the top.

[Walt Starr]

60. But Mel IS a fundamentalist wacko

My gosh!

[chiburb]

63. We also give the "right" ammo when we start threads...

That INVITE responses like "Mel is a fundamentalist wacko" and "Mel hates Jews" .

Too bad if they can't handle the truth.

[Suspicious]

98. This type of review

is making me seriously debate whether or not I want to see the film.

I'm not Christian, but I have always been inspired by the overall image of Christ, the message of love, kindness and respect for all fellow human beings. Because my belief system is not Christian in nature, I may not believe he was the son of God, but I do see Christ as a magnificent and inspirational teacher, a prophet of sorts.

I love art in any form, whether it be literature, music, paintings, film or other, but I don't think I, personally, would enjoy a film in which a great man's life is reduced to nothing on screen, save the last heart-wrenching 12 hours, in every last vivid, blood soaked detail.

That's just me, though...I suspect Gibson is going to make a stack off this film, with or without my ticket purchase. }(

Thanks for the review clip...

[leftchick]

57. read the review.....

that "anti-Semitic crap" is in there too. I have to admit, Mel sure knows how to lure in a selected audience... :eyes:

[FrankBooth]

48. Mel Gibson has the exact same right to approach scripture literally

Yes he has the right. And I have the right to say that anyone who approaches scripture "literally" deserves the criticism they receive. Welcome to America.

[Dookus]

67. literal?

I read a review that said he includes the story of Veronica wiping Jesus' face.

Which canonical gospel is that in?

Keep searching.... I'll wait.

[trumad]

75. I loved Last Temptation of Christ!

There ain't no doubt that Jesus banged Mary the Whore and banged her good! Stuck up in a cave, all alone... Oh he banged her alright!

I don't know how to love him
What to do, how to move him
I've been changed, yes really changed
In these past few days
When I've seen myself
I seem like someone else

I don't know how to take this
I don't see why he moves me
He's a man
He's just a man
And I've had so many
Men before
In very many ways
He's just one more

Look at them...They're definatly into each other!

[Tinoire]

82. Wow. Sex fixation. What a shock! So who else bonked whom?

Never mind. You can't even keep your movies straight much less the stories in them. But what the hell, mix them all up and embellish like mad. No surprise...

[trumad]

86. In the Last Temptation of Christ

Jesus hallucinates and imagines that he married Mary Magdelene... So I'm guessing that he also hallucinated that he had dirty sex with her as well...

I contend he did so without the hallucinating... I mean after all he was a Er...MAN, hence the point of the fucking movie. Capiche?

Now if me mentioning the fact that Jesus may have played pounce the puppy with Mary the Prostitute offends your religious beliefs...Sorry

[Tinoire]

93. I am more offended that you can't keep your movies straight

and not mix Jesus Christ Superstar with a movie based on a book as deep as Kazantzakis'. The book's story line seems to have gone totally over your head but I am not surprised. Like I said, sex-fixated. So fixated that you need to rewrite the book and make it more than a hallucination.

Offended me with puerile language? Not to worry your little head about it. No offense even possible; childish posts merely annoy.

[trumad]

100. Dude...did you even see Last Temptation of Christ?

Here's a link to get you up to speed on the premise of the movie...
http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert_reviews/1998/01/010706.html
I threw the Mary song from JCS as a goof, but it apparently went er over your uhhh much more mature head.

Grow up! ;-)

[Tinoire]

103. Actually no. The movie bored me to death. The book on the otherhand

I watched about 45 minutes of the movie intermittently because I found it extemely boring. The book, on the other hand, was a work of art like all of Kazantzakis' books.

[Malva Zebrina]

96. I loved Jesus Christ Superstar --saw it on Broadway

in it's prime.

This thing Gibson has produced seems to be an indication of how far down the ladder we as a nation have come. Violence seems to be the predominant theme but the sad part is that it is justified "religiously" as something that is "necessary" in order to make us all realize what a complete sacrifice was made by a god for our "sins"

That is spin. Plain and simple.

Now if there were a god, would he really need Gibson to spin for him? Does this god really need the help of human beings to sell him?

[Blue_Chill]

77. Why should anyone leave Mel alone?

I understand where you are coming from but let the anti-theists and those that feel threatened by religion vent. You need to choose your battles if you are going to last in DU buddy.

I am however getting annoyed that they are using this movie as yet another excuse to bash religion as a whole. My ignore list is getting rather large.

[mac2]

92. Gladly

[silverlib]

78. My main concern

is for children. I hope that people who decide to view this movie leave their chilren out of the theatre. This is not rated R for nothing. If children love Jesus, they do not need to see this.

I will not see this movie. I veer away from any movie where the artist is pushing his own agenda through art. If I want to see an agenda, I'll see a documentary, i.e "Bowling for Columbine." I don't appreciate Gibson's agenda and don't like movies, even "Braveheart," where the violence overwhelms the underlying story. A few less amputated parts flying around, and I would have still gotten the point.

If people want to see this stuff, then that's their business and I find it no less offensive when they push their reasons why this is a significant film down my throat. I'll sit in my church pew and celebrate the love of Christ each Sunday. I will support any man, woman or animal that is abused, but I will not watch a story line that perpetuates abuse in any form. I don't have to look at pain and violence to understand pain and violence.

[Misinformed01]

83. Why do you post so much flame bait?

Just out of curiousity?

I don't care what you think of gay marriage (none of your business) or whether you go see the Mel Movie (none of my business).

Is this type of crap really that big of a deal in your life?

Go see the movie....it's going to cause just as much shit as Jesus of Nazareth, and within 6 months it's going to be obscure. So, go see it, and give us a movie review (One thumb up!)....

But, Christ on a shingle, quit making such a MELODRAMATIC OMG production out of every little thought that crosses your mind.

[MarkTwain]

84. Very Well Stated; Never has a moniker...

... for someone been so apt in its self-description of the individual who claims it.

"Brain washed," indeed. It says it all that is necessary about the intellectual quality of the post which began this thread. Pity.

[donco6]

104. No kidding

I just used "ignore" for the first time.

[Jawja]

85. Exactly....

except when I went to see "Last Temptation of Christ," I had to cross a picket line of protestors who didn't think I had a right to see what they thought was offensive; and even today, I can't rent it from Blockbusters.

I don't see anyone lining up to protest Gibson's film and I just betcha you will surely be able to rent Gibson's film from a Blockbusters Video.

I certainly wouldn't make someone cross me in a picket line to see what I might feel is an offensive presentation by Gibson, nor will I demand that mainstream video rentals exclude what I might consider to be piece of garbage; however, I will criticize this film on this forum as I please.

Hope you enjoy the movie.

[trumad]

87. Good post jawja

[mac2]

89. I don't care about this movie at all.

Leave me alone. Get off the subject.

[JasonDeter]

95. AMEN Bro!! Thank you for your post!

[scottxyz]

106. Why should we "leave Mel alone"? He can't leave Jews and gays alone

Robert Bray, spokesman for the National Gay and Lesbian Task
Force, was livid at Gibson's new statements.

"And I have a right to respond to Mel Gibson's anti-gay
defamation," Bray said. "He can kiss my queer ass. He can't
defame gays and then try to wiggle out of it by blaming the
translation. And he's not even denying he made the statements.
He's saying he has a right to his opinion.

"Gay fans of Mel Gibson need to throw away their 'Mad Max'
tapes and stop going to his movies until he stops defaming gay
people," Bray said.

In the original interview, in the Dec. 1 issue of the El
Pais Sunday magazine, Gibson was directly asked his opinion of
homosexuals. He responded, "They take it up the ass."

According to El Pais, he laughed, got up, bent over, pointed
to his butt, and continued, "This is only for taking a shit."

("Que les den por el culo." Gibson se rie, se levanta, pone
el trasero en pompa y se lo senala. "Esto es solo para hacer
caca.")

The interviewer recalled that Gibson previously had
expressed fear people would think he is gay because he's an
actor. He responded: "With this look, who's going to think I'm
gay.

"I don't lend myself to that type of confusion. Do I sound
like a homosexual? Do I talk like them? Do I move like them?"

("?Quien va a pensar que con esta pinta soy gay? Yo no me
presto a ese tipo de confusiones. ?Sueno como un homosexual?
?Hablo como ellos? ?Me muevo como ellos?")

Gibson also told El Pais that he quit the Catholic Church
because it has become too liberal and that, "God is the only one
who knows how many children we should have, and we should be
ready to accept that."

("Dios es el unico que sabe cuantos hijos debemos tener y
debemos estar dispuestos a que vengan.")

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=mel+gibson+gays&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&selm=rwocknerDozJw8.L0F%40netcom.com&rnum=1

= = =

Enjoy your movie. To each his own.

[bobbyboucher]

108. It's way past

9 pm. Don't make me come up there!

[annagull]

110. Does Mel or Jesus get done by the JEWS?

Lord I hope so... Those MELS need to be taken care of, maan...
I hopee this is seen as thee sarcasm that is needed in this country.

[fujiyama]

111. Don't spoil the ending for us!