Mel Gibsons (The Passion)

I'm surprised Mel didn't do the film in 3-D and OdorRama. Those sanguine spashes coming out at you with the pungent odor of open flesh wounds. I'm sure for realism he also couldn't have resisted having the Jewish hierarchy and the Roman guards just fart up a storm.

There's an Austrian artist, Hermann Nitsch, who's work deals with sacrifice ritual as art. The Vatican supports his work.


I remember years ago an exhibit of his came to the university in my town. Now, my town isn't really a fine arts kind of place, it being solidly blue collar, but this exhibit had the highest turnout for an art exhibit ever in this town because word got out that this guy paints with blood.

I guess blood sells.

Obviously it does and the Vatican has the largest collection of pornography on Earth. Mel is no fine artist, however. "Braveheart" is an action adventure film not the historical drama he would have you believe. It is rife with inaccuracies. Not that I didn't like the film -- it's just not one I would return to that often. The heavy handed machismo is best in small doses. In "Passion" its not in small doses -- it's in one large gagging dose.

Frank, could you accept the word truthful, as in "realistic." As in, if any man had been crucified by romans, it would have been pretty gruesome, which Mel captures better than the bible?

Mel captures better than the Bible? Man, that is a loaded statement.

After the recent mea culpa of the Catholic church's harboring of pedophiles, I don't give them any points for credibility in anything.

Well, the intent of the authors of the four gospels was not to gross people out. They didn't need graphic detail to get their point across. However, an actual crucifiction would have been pretty graphic.

The entire purpose of crucifixion was to serve as a graphic warning to anyone who might have been tempted to challeneg the authority of Rome. Interestingly enough, Crucifixion probably entered Roman practice by way of Carthage.

In hell the put the butter on BEFORE you touch the stove. But your quote is partially accurate, hobitbob.

Actually, my quote is from Amos Starkadder's sermon to the quivering brethren in Cold Comfort Farm.
I saw something nasty in the woodshed!

Anyway, it's a nice quote. Makes me want to be a better person. I guess I'm just a sucker for those little comforts.

I'm not trying to make a big thing of this, SCoates.

My point was that I could not understand how Domo was able to say that the Gibson movie presented the passion "in such a truthful way."

Do anything you want to with the words -- substitute whatever you will. The point is that I can think of no way that anyone currently alive can say anything substantive about the details of the execution of Jesus.

I think my point is self-evident -- and obvious. And I think Domo's words about the depiction being "truthful" or "realistic" or whatever else you want to use -- is gratuitous and imaginary.

NO INSULT WAS INTENDED -- nor should any be taken. It is merely an observation I was making about another person's observation.

Can't wait to see what Mel Gibson comes up with, when he makes a " true" film... Of Alice in Wonderland.

Are you a holocaust denier too or just a crucifixion denier?
Wondering... would you have made the same comment about Speilberg's Schindler's List? I mean I don't think Germanys spoke to each other in English at the time. Historically, VERY inaccurate.

A guide to useful Aramaic phrases at POTC screenings:


B-kheeruut re'yaaneyh laa kaaley tsuuraathaa khteepaathaa, ellaa Zaynaa Mqatlaanaa Trayaanaa laytaw!
It may be uncompromising in its liberal use of graphic violence, but Lethal Weapon II it ain't.

Da'ek teleyfoon methta'naanaak, pquud. Guudaapaw!
Please turn off your mobile phone. It is blasphemous.

Shbuuq shuukhaaraa deel. Man ethnaggad udamshaa?
Sorry I'm late. Have I missed any scourging?

Aykaa beyt tadkeetha? Zaadeq lee d-asheeg eeday men perdey devshaanaayey haaleyn!
Where is the loo? I need to wash my hands of this popcorn.

Een, Yuudaayaa naa, ellaa b-haw yawmaa laa hweeth ba-mdeetaa.
Yes, I'm Jewish, but I wasn't there that day.

Demketh! Udamaa lemath mtaynan b-tash'eetha d-khashey?
I fell asleep! What station of the cross are we up to?

Ma'hed lee qalleel d-Khayey d-Breeyaan, ellaa dlaa gukhkaa.
It sort of reminds me of Life of Brian, but it's nowhere near as funny.

Ktaabaa taab hwaa meneyh.
It's not as good as the book.

And many more, located at this link:How do you say 'popcorn' in Aramaic?

It would seem to me that many of the posters coming out against this movie are no better than the people that came out against "The Last Temptation of Christ" If "Passion of Christ" offends you, or bothers you, don't go see it. Don't give Mel your money. Stay at home.

The only ones raising a fuss on A2K are those that can't seem to realize that someone else may think differently than them.

For some people, this is a good movie. For others, it's not.

That's going to be the consensus on the film -- some will overlook that the blood and gore is to their taste and some will not. Those who choose to overlook it (by admission, one saying they covered their eyes) will see the film as another traversal of the events. I also agree that it is only a movie and the furor will fade away as something else makes the news.

As far as covering one's eyes, I think Mel would be dismayed that they didn't get the full thrust of his movie.

William Safire has an interesting colum on the film today. His argument is that Gibson tries to make sadism and ultra-violence acceptable because it serves a higher purpose. If this is acceptable, then other filmmakers can use the same argument to depict even more violent and sadistic.

And, he wonders, why is this version of the story any different from the Passion Plays that stirred up so much trouble for Jews in the old days?

But I agree with McG in this regard: Those of us who object to the film can choose not to see it. Same was true for "Last Temptation". But we do have the right to discuss it...

Quote..
"Are you a holocaust denier too or just a crucifixion denier"

I'm the same as you.. I don't really know, but unlike you. I haven't a mythical axe to grind.

Quote...
"would you have made the same comment about Speilberg's Schindler's List? I mean I don't think Germanys spoke to each other in English at the time. Historically, VERY inaccurate."

Quote...
I think.. ( guess ) the same as you, they most likely didn't, but by the same token there was enough historical fact in the film for me to believe the basic story, unlike Mels Guess about his mythical jesus.

My comments were purely sarcastic, wich if I offend you, I'm sorry, but if Mel reads this... I hope my sarcastic comment finds fertile ground to grow in.

YES!!!!!!