I saw "The Passion of the Christ" on opening night

[Elad]

First let me say that I had absolutely no intention of seeing this movie originally. I'm what I guess would best be described as a strongly anti-dogmatic, ex-Christian, spiritual person that usually describes himself as an atheist or agnostic simply to avoid having to explain his complicated spiritual beliefs. Based on everything I had read about this movie I was convinced it was totally going to suck and I had no desire to support it with my dollars.

However, I am glad I went to see it. And despite the endless supply of threads on this topic, I'm going to explain why. :)

I got talked into seeing the movie by a good friend, who was going with a group of friends that we had been meaning to get together for several weeks. I didn't really want to see the movie, but I wanted to hang out with the friends since we'd been trying for so long to meet up. So I decided to go, despite my reservations.

The movie was nothing like I expected. There was little preaching to the audience, it focused mostly on the telling of the story. There was little "editorializing" by Gibson. He included a few odd scenes, mostly involving Judas and Satan, that had no Biblical basis whatsoever that seemed to be mostly his personal airing of grievances against the characters (Judas and Satan), but these parts were not a major part of the movie and were easily ignored.

The movie was terribly gorey, everyone was right about that. It was quite possibly the most graphically violent and disturbing movie I've ever seen. But I honestly can't object to this, as the crucifixion was, according to the Bible, terribly gorey and violent.

All in all, the one thing that made me glad I saw the movie was the fact that the movie was able to humanize a story that was so terribly communicated in the Bible. Reading the Bible, it's damn near impossible to "get into" the story, empathize with the characters, and read it like a good book. The stuff in there just isn't told in a good, story-telling sense. Gibson's movie was able to overcome this obstacle and present the story in a way that allowed you to empathize with the characters, to get into the story, and feel emotional about it, and this is it's redeeming quality.

Personally, I recommend it. No matter what you believe about the Bible, it's still a good story, and Gibson told it well, and the lack of preaching to the audience was quite refreshing.

Anyway, that's my take on it... :)

[Maddy McCall]

1. I can't see it here because First Baptist Church bought up all the tickets

to use in their ministry to distribute to church members and "those out of contact with Christ." Evidently I fall beyond the limits of those two groups. ;-)

I appreciate your opinion on it, and if next week tickets are available I will go see it.

:-)

[regnaD kciN]

2. What were your thoughts on the "A-word"...?

..."Anti-Semitism," that is. Present or absent?

[GodHelpUsAll2]

3. I just saw it tonight

And not, it's not. It followed the facts. It was very moving and an experience I don't think I will ever forget. It drew such emotion. I recomend everyone see it. However, it is very brutal and graphic. But, it was in fact a brutal event so to portray it any other way would not be true to scripture.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

4. FACTS?

Something that occurred or exists and is incontrovertible.= FACT

The 'Lectric Law Library's Legal Lexicon
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/f093.htm

[Dogmudgeon]

5. The popular use of the word "Facts"

"Facts" = "Information as presented".

The word "Fact" actually comes from a Latin word meaning "something which has been made". The legal use is more precise, but most people use the popular sense.

--bkl
And that's a fact, Jack!

[asteroid2003QQ47]

7. Lie to me

"Facts" = "Information as presented".
Most people (and evidently BareKnuckledLiberal?) use the popular sense.

By that logic, George W. Bush might well head the Most Factual U.S. Presidents list, might he not?

[Dogmudgeon]

14. Not at all

All information is subject to scrutiny.

If your facts -- information as presented -- are lies, then they are lies.

The popular usage doesn't scrutinize -- the legal usage requires it. And I think it's important that people look into as many such facts as they can.

George Bush certainly presents us with a lot of facts. And a huge number of them are lies. Factual they ain't.

--bkl

[meti57b]

6. The Romans used crucifixion to execute tens of thousands of people ...

and other civilizations used it before them. It was an act of enormous violence and brutality. What is the point of watching a graphic depiction of how it was done.

[joeybee12]

8. So, you recommend a historically inaccurate, anti-Semitic movie, gory

snuff movie directed by a simple-minded, homophobic, coke-snorting womanizer?

[Deja Q]

9. Worse than "Gladiator"?

That was badly written, but Gladiator was entertainment - if you can call it that... and it was gorey too. Is "Passion" just as bloody, or do they save the main source of entertainment to the final minutes?

The Bible is supposed to be the Rule of Law, mandated, turn into a pillar of salt if you go against it sort of thing... why should it be entertaining?

Also, I can't stand it when bio-pics get watered down or cleaned up. "Beautiful Mind" cleaned up its character's life. "Passion" seems to get watered down with phony editorializing.

[TheWhitneyBrown]

10. Typical Hollywood Happy Ending

After all that, the guy comes back to life at the end! That's when they lost me.

[Susang]

12. LOL

Welcome to DU! We can always use another person with a wicked sense of humor! :-)

[ConcernedCanuk]

11. I'll see it when it hits Northern Canukville, or maybe the tube

.
.
.

And I don't understand all the "hoopla" over the movie being gory or historically inaccurate -

It's a MOVIE, not a documentary -

so enjoy it for what it does have -

and I see some people attacking the movie because of it's "creator" Mel Gibson, who apparently is not an angel -

Judge the movie for the MOVIE, not the author - -

Remember

Who gave Murika one of their most beloved vehicles ??



hmm - well that would be HITLER

yup, the man was evil,

but the car was genius -

just a Canuk's observations

[blondeatlast]

13. Thanks for the review--I think I'll see it , but after the hoopla dies dow

Maybe.

It's good to see a fairly neutral take on it. Love your critique of the Bible! I'm a Xian who considers the Bible basically the mythology of our beliefs, and I hearily agree--hard to get into.

As a librarian, I'm looking forward to more controversial reviews! I hear Pub Weekly is looking for reviewers...

:hi: