Reply
Thu 10 Feb, 2005 08:44 am
Newmarket has announced there will be a new version of Mel Gibson's "The Passion" recut (sic) to exclude much of the over-the-top blood and violence which put-off so many critcis and moviegoers (even though he's certainly made enough money from those who wanted to see how Christ was really made into a minute steak by the Romans and Jews). This "sanitized" version is also obviously aimed at non-Catholics including clerics who criticized the movie for what they characterized as pornographic violence. Is this an appeal to the protestants in the audience who didn't buy into his concept that every conceivable historical account of Roman punishment was used on Christ when the Bible merely states "he was scourged?" If they had giant meat tenderizers in Roman times, I'm sure they would have also been used. Maybe a final barbecue on a George Forman grill?
Oy ... good grief.
Christians had thier day in the theaters... isnt that enough?
Fact is, if there was a man who went though that kind of torture several thousands of years ago, it would have been bloody!
The entire reason Gibson produced this movie was to show how things probally were. To take away the bunny foo-foo happyness of the HANGING of a man by his hands that you find in the bible and remind people that a hanging BODY is ruthless, painfull and bloody.
Uhh....... I would think anyone who was nailed by thier hands and feet would BLEED.. and be TORTURED.. wouldnt you?
>sigh<
i have yet to see this movie. I dont know that I ever will.. but if i do, i want GORE!!! hehehe
It wasn't that bad.....the worst parts were not actually shown. It was the shots where you HEARD things that were the worst. The imagination is a grusome thing....
Heard things? That's funny. I does show how desensitized the American moviegoer and, unfortunatey, the fundamentalist Catholic has become.
The only film that may approach the film in grossness are films like "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and even it draws back from some of the pointedly and lovingly focused shots of blood and pieces of flesh flying through the air. I suggest one sees the film again and in slow motion. I really don't want to go over the historical, Biblical and archaelogical inaccuries in the film again -- that's been hashed over too many times. This is Mel's vision and he did stand by it. By paring it back, it's an admission that it was exagerrated in the first place. Just my opinion.
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace