The Passion of the Christ

[Otto]

Have anyone seen it ?

I want to see it but it seems like they aren't going to show it in Sweden

 

[Stazbumpa]

Subject matter doesn't really interest me. Its supposed to show the pain and suffering that Jesus was willing to endure for the people, but essentially its a 2 hour film about someone being beaten up and tortured constantly.

Plus Mel Gibson directed it, so I doubt it'll have any common ground with what actually happened historically anyway.

 

[Uncle Sick]

Please use spoiler tags when you talk about the movie - I want to go see it and be surprised about the ending.

 

[Tom]

I'll be going to see it, I don't think I could call myself a film fan and not go and see it.

 

[Uncle Sick]

I'll be going to see it, I don't think I could call myself a film fan and not go and see it.

tom in anti-semitic shockah!11

 

[Mofo8]

Does anyone know what certification it's going to have in the UK. I watched it this afternoon, and it's bloody brutal. It's a really well put together film, and is well worth watching whether you're at all interested in religion or not.

I've seen a few complaints about historical points, namely:

• Apparently Greek would have been spoken where Latin is used in the film
• Jesus is shown carrying the whole cross, whereas the 2 criminals carry only the horizontal bit. The Romans were pretty efficient at this method of execution, and the vertical posts stayed in situ and were reused.
• The old nails through the palm thing (instead of through the bones of the wrist)

nothing as bad as the horrendous amount of mistakes and liberal massaging of history that went on with Braveheart or The Patriot. Apart from the 3 main points listed above they seem to have got everything else pretty much spot on, in terms of costume, uniforms, buildings and the general flavour and look.

On the subject of perceived anti-semitism... I don't remember the English getting their knickers in a twist too much over Braveheart or The Patriot or calling for either of these films to be modified or banned. The Roman Legionnaries in the film are portrayed in many cases as worse than the Jews, yet I hear no complaints from the Italians.

 

[FuzzyLogic]

It's an 18, shouldn't have needed someone to tell you that like


http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Class...D3E1ECB136CC552F80256E3F003194FC?OpenDocument


No cuts thankfully, if there's something that pisses me off it classifying something for adults only to tell them they can't see certain parts because it's all nasty and stuff, it's like being treated like a bloody child again.

(I know there are genuine reasons behind it but it still riles me)

Oh, and in U571 the British Government did get all pissy about some innaccuracies, and with good reason.

 

[Tom]

The Roman Legionnaries in the film are portrayed in many cases as worse than the Jews, yet I hear no complaints from the Italians.

Being Roman didn't mean you would automatically be Italian btw.

 

[Mofo8]

It's an 18, shouldn't have needed someone to tell you that like


http://www.bbfc.co.uk/website/Class...D3E1ECB136CC552F80256E3F003194FC?OpenDocument


No cuts thankfully, if there's something that pisses me off it classifying something for adults only to tell them they can't see certain parts because it's all nasty and stuff, it's like being treated like a bloody child again.

(I know there are genuine reasons behind it but it still riles me)

Oh, and in U571 the British Government did get all pissy about some innaccuracies, and with good reason.

The BBFC at least seem to be being consistent with their classification. The MPAA in America have rated it 'R-Restricted' which means that anyone under 17 has to have an accompanying parent/guardian with them. I reckon there will be a lot of people in the States taking their young children to see this. The yanks seem to have no real equivalent of our '18' rating. Their nearest equivalent would appear to be 'NC-17' meaning no-one under 17 allowed. The thought that some god-bothering, bible-bashing, right-wing nutjob in the USA can drag his children to watch this disturbs me slightly... as I said earlier, I'm not a believer, but this film seems to stay with you for a while, to the extent that I couldn't get a good nights sleep after seeing it.

Your point about film cuts is true.

U-571 was an out and out piece of fiction. What's next? Are they going to make a WW2 movie showing US soldiers raising the Stars 'n' Stripes above the Reichstag as they liberate Berlin?

 

[Mofo8]

Being Roman didn't mean you would automatically be Italian btw.

I think being A Roman would kinda make you sort of Italian. Being Italian on the other hand would not necessarily make one a Roman though, and the Legionnaries in the film could have come from any number of conquered countries: Germany, Gaul, Hispania... take your pick.

I think you understand the point I was making.

 

[Doh_boy]

In answer to your question mofo, isn't Tom Cruise doing a Battle of Britain movie? D)

Yes

 

[DaGaffer]

I think being A Roman would kinda make you sort of Italian. Being Italian on the other hand would not necessarily make one a Roman though, and the Legionnaries in the film could have come from any number of conquered countries: Germany, Gaul, Hispania... take your pick.

I think you understand the point I was making.

No it wouldn't. Chances are if you were a legionary stationed in Judea, you were probably originally from Britain, Gaul or Iberia. Stationing troops at the opposite ends of the empire was pretty much standard policy. The only 'Italians' would have been the senior Politicos and other officers/officials. Most 'Romans' never saw Rome, and hardly any were Italians.

Getting back to the film, Mel Gibson's politics make watching anything he's involved in difficult for me, and I'm kind of wondering what the actual point of the movie is supposed to be...does it tell us anything new?

 

[FuzzyLogic]

U-571 was an out and out piece of fiction. What's next? Are they going to make a WW2 movie showing US soldiers raising the Stars 'n' Stripes above the Reichstag as they liberate Berlin?

Don't tempt them, Hollywood is capable of anything O~O

It's a movie of fiction i agree, but the underlying story was true (not literally of course ) and no reference was made initially to the people that had died for their countries in the operation (gawd, I sound like a flag waving patriot now oO).

Movies have the horrible tendency to be taken for fact by the masses, and not at the very least mentioning that it's a fictional story confuses many.

History is written by the winners as someone who may or may not have been important said once

 

[nath]

• Apparently Greek would have been spoken where Latin is used in the film

I thought it was all in aramaic?

 

[Uncle Sick]

Aramaic and Latin. I think the "Greek was supposed be spoken" is wrong info.

Americans are either rather upset about the idiocy of the movie (in the north) or "omfg that's reality!1 poor jesus!11" (in the south).

One woman had a heart attack during the movie, supposedly because it had upset her so much.

Mind the US stance and history towards extreme spirituality, though.
After all - their 'founding fathers' were all European religious extremists, driven into exile by their local governments......

 

[tRoG]

Doesn't matter if it's any good or not, it'll get record viewings because of all this publicy surrounding it.

I mean, if the church says, "Don't watch this blasphemous film, or you shall go to hell!" - what's the first thing you're going to do?

 

[Mofo8]

Aramaic and Latin. I think the "Greek was supposed be spoken" is wrong info.

Americans are either rather upset about the idiocy of the movie (in the north) or "omfg that's reality!1 poor jesus!11" (in the south).

One woman had a heart attack during the movie, supposedly because it had upset her so much.

Mind the US stance and history towards extreme spirituality, though.
After all - their 'founding fathers' were all European religious extremists, driven into exile by their local governments......

I don't know enough about what went on in the middle east during the 1st century to know for a fact whether Greek or Latin should have been used in the movie. I do know that many biblical scholars and historians are questioning the use of Latin, especially in the dialogue between Pilate and Christ. Jews living outside Italy would almost certainly not have spoken Latin, and Pilate would have been unlikely to learn the language of a conquered enemy people. Speech between people of the 2 groups would most likely have been in Koine Greek, which was in effect the 'English' of the time and learned by most educated men as their second language.

I'm interested in your statement that people in the North of the USA are upset by it's idiocy. As I said before, I'm not a believer, just interested in good movies, and a wee bit of a student of history and politics. I thought most Christian groups in the USA (including Roman Catholics, Baptists, Evangelists, and all the weird and wonderful Protestant splinter groups) were broadly behind this film. Did you mean people in the north from non-Christian backgrounds. So far, the only real and forceful objections to this film have come from the Jewish Community. I can see many people being affected by the movie (including a few more heart attacks), but I can't see us descending back to the middle ages with jews being attacked in the street during Easter.

 

[Mofo8]

I thought it was all in aramaic?

The jews speak Aramaic in the move to each other, and to the Romans. The Romans speak Latin to each other and the jews. Pilate first addresses Jesus in Aramaic, and Jesus replies in fluent Latin.

 

[Uncle Sick]

I don't know enough about what went on in the middle east during the 1st century to know for a fact whether Greek or Latin should have been used in the movie. I do know that many biblical scholars and historians are questioning the use of Latin, especially in the dialogue between Pilate and Christ. Jews living outside Italy would almost certainly not have spoken Latin, and Pilate would have been unlikely to learn the language of a conquered enemy people. Speech between people of the 2 groups would most likely have been in Koine Greek, which was in effect the 'English' of the time and learned by most educated men as their second language.

I'm interested in your statement that people in the North of the USA are upset by it's idiocy. As I said before, I'm not a believer, just interested in good movies, and a wee bit of a student of history and politics. I thought most Christian groups in the USA (including Roman Catholics, Baptists, Evangelists, and all the weird and wonderful Protestant splinter groups) were broadly behind this film. Did you mean people in the north from non-Christian backgrounds. So far, the only real and forceful objections to this film have come from the Jewish Community. I can see many people being affected by the movie (including a few more heart attacks), but I can't see us descending back to the middle ages with jews being attacked in the street during Easter.

I think I will have to agree with the first part of your post - it makes absolute sense if there has been a dialogue between Pilate and Jesus (ie. I am doubting that the man ever existed plus Pilate wasn't Roman governor at the time of Jesus. I remember reading about that.).

Second part of your post - well, and I am generalizing a bit here, people in the North are generally better educated and alot more liberal than people in the bible belt (ie. the mid-west) and the south. Faithful christians don't firebomb abortion clinics or harass gays/foreigners (like me)/jews/blacks.

What I have seen in the news here - so far - a billboard in Alabama, in front of a church, bearing the words "Jews killed our Lord Saviour", interviews with people having seen the movie in terms of "I was so shocked to see what they did with JC, those animals" etc.

Most Americans, and I am generalizing again, are as gullible as little children.

 

[Mofo8]

I think I will have to agree with the first part of your post - it makes absolute sense if there has been a dialogue between Pilate and Jesus (ie. I am doubting that the man ever existed plus Pilate wasn't Roman governor at the time of Jesus. I remember reading about that.).

Second part of your post - well, and I am generalizing a bit here, people in the North are generally better educated and alot more liberal than people in the bible belt (ie. the mid-west) and the south. Faithful christians don't firebomb abortion clinics or harass gays/foreigners (like me)/jews/blacks.

What I have seen in the news here - so far - a billboard in Alabama, in front of a church, bearing the words "Jews killed our Lord Saviour", interviews with people having seen the movie in terms of "I was so shocked to see what they did with JC, those animals" etc.

Most Americans, and I am generalizing again, are as gullible as little children.

Oh dear... that does sound a bit worrying. It's at this point that my lack of knowledge of Christian doctrine comes into play. I thought the whole idea was that the events that happened 'had to happen'. Now, if you believe in the whole thing, then surely everyone from Judas, the High Priests, Pilate, the jews who called for cruxification, and the Roman soldiers who did the scourging and the banging in of nails, did their part. I've never understood that part, or had it explained to me in church or school. If the events were pre-ordained and part of the plan, the how can anyone be blamed? What would Plan B be? If a Temple Guard or Roman had just walked up to Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemense (sp?) and lopped his head clean off, it wouldn't really be the same thing..... "Christ suffered and died for our sins" .... "Nah.. he didn't feel a thing - it was instantaneous." I seem to remember that one of the most contraversial things about 'The Last Temptation' film was that Judas was portrayed as the most trusted and loved follower, who had nevertheless to play his part.

Anyway... I think I'd be better off going into some religious forum and stirring things up a bit by asking these questions.

 

[Doh_boy]

As far as I can remember, judas was a very loyal follower but he believed that Jesus would lead a rebellion against the romans and when this didn't happen he became somewhat disgruntled.

 

[DaGaffer]

Never understood the whole "had to suffer and die for our sins" thing tbh. Why? God is omnipotent, Jesus is God's son, Jesus (a part of God) dies, and we're 'saved'? How? Why? God can surely do what he wants to man, so this is all a bit of a charade. Why would a God require any sacrifice, let alone that of his own son? What's the point? My head hurts...

 

[Jupitus]

Why would a God require any sacrifice, let alone that of his own son? What's the point? My head hurts...

I think the idea is that "God gave up his own son's life to prove his love for us and to show us the error of our ways" or something... interesting discussion

 

[Doh_boy]

Due to adams sin (the apple) no body (no matter how good you were) could get into heaven. So Jesus is God made human so he dies and has to goto heaven thus opening the way for everyone else. Also Jesus made an new 'agreement' between god and man. Basically a whole new set of rules, like an update if you will.

Apologies if this is wrong, it's been ages since I was told this stuff.

 

[DaGaffer]

Due to adams sin (the apple) no body (no matter how good you were) could get into heaven. So Jesus is God made human so he dies and has to goto heaven thus opening the way for everyone else. Also Jesus made an new 'agreement' between god and man. Basically a whole new set of rules, like an update if you will.

Apologies if this is wrong, it's been ages since I was told this stuff.

But if God's Omnipotent he could have let us into heaven anytime he liked... and he stacked the deck in the Garden of Eden anyway! In fact, if you start with the premise that God is all-powerful, then none of the Bible makes any sense, but if there are limits to his power, then his whole raison d'etre goes down the tubes. My head hurts again...

 

[Stazbumpa]

Due to adams sin (the apple) no body (no matter how good you were) could get into heaven. So Jesus is God made human so he dies and has to goto heaven thus opening the way for everyone else. Also Jesus made an new 'agreement' between god and man. Basically a whole new set of rules, like an update if you will.

Apologies if this is wrong, it's been ages since I was told this stuff.

I like the idea of that but it has one major flaw ie: Judaism would therefore be a religion that won't get you into heaven and the Jews are not Gods people. I'm not being anti-semetic, think about it.
If Adam/Eve ate the apple and damned humanity, then what was the point in believing in God? The Jews were suffering under the Egyptions and Romans for no reason at all because thanks to muppet features Adam (or Eve), they were never going to get into heaven anyway.
So along came JC, God made human as you say, who loads version 2 of Gods word(s) and sorts it all out.
That still leaves the Jews in the lurch so to speak because they've been believing in God all this time only for him to say "sorry, here's a new deal for you, I'll kill my son to prove it". Admittedly, I don't think Christianity was a religion in itself until several hundred years after JC coz he was Jewish anyway.
And if it was God updating things, why haven't all God fearing types switched over to Christianity?

Like you say though, you could be wrong in why JC died, but it's just an interesting spin on your original point.

 

[Uncle Sick]

The jews have also no concept of hell (well, neither had the christian church until the clergy needed something to cow their followers...) and they prohibit cruelty towards animuls. Me likes. *grows locks and a fuzzy beard*

 

[DaGaffer]

The jews have also no concept of hell (well, neither had the christian church until the clergy needed something to cow their followers...) and they prohibit cruelty towards animuls. Me likes. *grows locks and a fuzzy beard*

Really? Didn't know that Jews had no concept of Hell. I know the Romans didn't (hence the inaccuracy of Russell Crowe's "Unleash Hell" line in Gladiator). Doesn't Hell appear anywhere in the Old Testament then?

 

[Scooba da Bass]

Really? Didn't know that Jews had no concept of Hell. I know the Romans didn't (hence the inaccuracy of Russell Crowe's "Unleash Hell" line in Gladiator). Doesn't Hell appear anywhere in the Old Testament then?

The Jews have something called Gehenna, suffering for the wicked dead, which is akin to purgatory.

 

[Mofo8]

The jews... ...they prohibit cruelty towards animuls

Just as well, 'cause then they can save up all their cruelty for the people of Palestine. I've nothing against jews or Judaism, but the modern state of Israel has a lot to answer for.