passion pg 4
Dragonbones - ... but who wants to watch an orgy of violence and suffering?
bob - People who are into that kind of thing. S&M I think they call it. It's a big thing in shame based societies
redandy - Well, I think if you watch the Passion and only watch the violence that was done to Jesus, then you've missed the point. The Gospel story is not about how terrible the Jewish leaders and the Romans were, it's about how Jesus reacted to them.
As for whether it's justified to show it in film, consider 1) The story is extremely violent in itself -- there may be some question about whether every specific event happened exactly as the Bible and other sources indicate, as some have noted, but the movie follows the story pretty closely for the most part. 2) In the Bible the extreme violence is integral in highlighting the depth of Jesus's forgiveness ("forgive them, for they know not what they do").
As for accusations of stirring up violent anti-semitism, well, any Christian who interprets the story as a promotion of violence betrays their own beliefs. Someone willing to do that isn't really a Christian, they're just a bigot and they'd find some way to fuel that with or without this movie.
bob - I think most of us got that point. But as has been stated in this thread umpteen million times already, we could have gotten it with about a third the violence. More of the film could have been devoted to other aspects of the story. Given the sadomasochists a little less to jerk off over and a little more to think about like. Whatever. I give up.
redandy - Does that mean I win?
Just kidding Bob. But still, are people still more likely to be influenced by Passion than all the other violence out there that's actually on movies where the time period is today and the place is LA or NY?
redandy - I've been thinking back to when I saw the movie (shortly after it came out at an theatre in the States). The reaction I saw wasn't that of an audience enjoying the "orgy" of violence. It was a very sober reaction -- some crying, others thinking intently, a few discussions -- definitely nobody laughing it up about how cool it was to see someone get beat like that. Granted, there's different interpretations in different places, but a U.S. theatre with lots of Christians was probably pretty close to the target audience that were by and large seeing the movie.
bob - What was all that extra blood and torture for? There is no satisfactory answers to that questions and that is why the film, despite its tremendous production values, is essentially a muddle headed mess, or worse, an exercise in hypocrisy.
redandy - Are you an expert in how much it takes to kill someone? I mean really, can you tell me whether a beating would kill someone on the spot, or just get close enough that they wouldn't last much longer? We know he was severely beaten, spat on, etc. As Jesus was not a Roman citizen he probably recieved more than 39 lashes with the whip, and as somewhat of a revolutionary may have gotten a particularly harsh beating, the skin would have literally been nearly completely ripped off his back. He was incapable of carrying the cross up the hill, and the soldiers were surprised at how quickly he died once on the cross. So I'd say beaten to very near death is a fairly accurate portrayal -- if they overshot, it wasn't by a whole lot.
2) I bring up the audience because you offer the idea that somewhere perverts are getting off on violence, but you don't really give anything to support that, so the only retort I can give is that I didn't see it when I went and saw it. As for preaching to the choir, yes that's exactly the case, it was no secret that Christians and those interested in Christianity would be the primary market, since people tend to go see movies about topics they are interested in.
Ultimately, yes it was an extremely violent movie, yes it was somewhat disturbing - as it was meant to be. However, it was given an R rating, and was billed as being extremely violent - so the audiences had fair warning. Frankly, I don't see how the risk that a few perverts somewhere, somehow may get off on the violence outweighs the benefit of having a considerably accurate portrayal of a story that is so important to so many people.
Satellite TV - bob wrote: Given the sadomasochists a little less to jerk off over and a little more to think about like. Whatever. I give up.
You give up too easily Bob. We appreciate you thoughts on the film.
bob - People who are into that kind of thing. S&M I think they call it. It's a big thing in shame based societies
redandy - Well, I think if you watch the Passion and only watch the violence that was done to Jesus, then you've missed the point. The Gospel story is not about how terrible the Jewish leaders and the Romans were, it's about how Jesus reacted to them.
As for whether it's justified to show it in film, consider 1) The story is extremely violent in itself -- there may be some question about whether every specific event happened exactly as the Bible and other sources indicate, as some have noted, but the movie follows the story pretty closely for the most part. 2) In the Bible the extreme violence is integral in highlighting the depth of Jesus's forgiveness ("forgive them, for they know not what they do").
As for accusations of stirring up violent anti-semitism, well, any Christian who interprets the story as a promotion of violence betrays their own beliefs. Someone willing to do that isn't really a Christian, they're just a bigot and they'd find some way to fuel that with or without this movie.
bob - I think most of us got that point. But as has been stated in this thread umpteen million times already, we could have gotten it with about a third the violence. More of the film could have been devoted to other aspects of the story. Given the sadomasochists a little less to jerk off over and a little more to think about like. Whatever. I give up.
redandy - Does that mean I win?
Just kidding Bob. But still, are people still more likely to be influenced by Passion than all the other violence out there that's actually on movies where the time period is today and the place is LA or NY?
redandy - I've been thinking back to when I saw the movie (shortly after it came out at an theatre in the States). The reaction I saw wasn't that of an audience enjoying the "orgy" of violence. It was a very sober reaction -- some crying, others thinking intently, a few discussions -- definitely nobody laughing it up about how cool it was to see someone get beat like that. Granted, there's different interpretations in different places, but a U.S. theatre with lots of Christians was probably pretty close to the target audience that were by and large seeing the movie.
bob - What was all that extra blood and torture for? There is no satisfactory answers to that questions and that is why the film, despite its tremendous production values, is essentially a muddle headed mess, or worse, an exercise in hypocrisy.
redandy - Are you an expert in how much it takes to kill someone? I mean really, can you tell me whether a beating would kill someone on the spot, or just get close enough that they wouldn't last much longer? We know he was severely beaten, spat on, etc. As Jesus was not a Roman citizen he probably recieved more than 39 lashes with the whip, and as somewhat of a revolutionary may have gotten a particularly harsh beating, the skin would have literally been nearly completely ripped off his back. He was incapable of carrying the cross up the hill, and the soldiers were surprised at how quickly he died once on the cross. So I'd say beaten to very near death is a fairly accurate portrayal -- if they overshot, it wasn't by a whole lot.
2) I bring up the audience because you offer the idea that somewhere perverts are getting off on violence, but you don't really give anything to support that, so the only retort I can give is that I didn't see it when I went and saw it. As for preaching to the choir, yes that's exactly the case, it was no secret that Christians and those interested in Christianity would be the primary market, since people tend to go see movies about topics they are interested in.
Ultimately, yes it was an extremely violent movie, yes it was somewhat disturbing - as it was meant to be. However, it was given an R rating, and was billed as being extremely violent - so the audiences had fair warning. Frankly, I don't see how the risk that a few perverts somewhere, somehow may get off on the violence outweighs the benefit of having a considerably accurate portrayal of a story that is so important to so many people.
Satellite TV - bob wrote: Given the sadomasochists a little less to jerk off over and a little more to think about like. Whatever. I give up.
You give up too easily Bob. We appreciate you thoughts on the film.
posted by david at 3:21 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home