Mel Gibson's The Passion, sparking concern from the ADL.

Here is a side issue; I don't know that it has been brought up on the "Passion" threads:
A man living near Houston murdered his girlfriend by hanging. He arranged the scene to make her death an apparent suicide. He had committed a perfect crime. But, on seeing Gibson's film, he confessed. His reasoning was that unless he made a clean slate of it he could not repent and get into Heaven. His televised statement was all "me" and "I" with no words of remorse for his crime. Oh, he learned how to arrange the evidence from watching the television show "CSI," I think it is.

Hey, that could beat out using psychics to solve crimes! Unfortunately, we'll never know if it would have prevented the crime if he had seen the film before committing the murder.

You're right. I don't think any more of the man after the confession than I would have before. I don't see him as a moral man just going by what I have seen and read of him.

You have to believe that Gibson just put the movie out their as an expression of his beliefs with no inspiration to "save" anybody.

Nope, Lightwizard. I believe he did it primarily to make money. Which it has. The fact that it also expressed his beliefs was just icing on the cake.

If he was truly "inspired," he would have donated the profits.

edited, with embarrassment

I don't doubt Gibson's sincerety. I seem to recall, many people were predicting a box office disaster, based on the language used and various other features that escape me for the moment. Gibson was said to be willing to lose his money to create a work that stated the tale to his exact specifications.

Yeah, sure. I didn't read anything about the film not making money except that not sub-titling it would be an affectation that could likely torpedo its chances. Most of what I had read and agreed with is that it would do well with the target audience. The target more believably being the St. Sebastians in the audience and the arrows have obviously hit them straight on. I don't believe anyone will come up with figures on how many went to see it for the notariety on the brutality and Anti-Semitism (a mixed reaction to that one except for the bad history of Passion Plays) and how many went to see it who are devout Christians. Some would have gone for more than one reason.

There's no mistaking it is a polished product with high production values. That's about all it is.

Dwelling on second guessing what motivation is behind the negative reviews is an exercise in futility.

I have little choice but to get it on DVD just to keep up with everyone. But I will not sit in an audience to watch it.

Hey, when someone fesses up, just mouthing a statement won't do it. This guy better feel extreme remorse and with incredible deep feeling seek out those he has hurt and make amends. Maybe even going around talking (for the remainder of his life)about how he was saved by "Amazing Grace."

The Houston guy who committed the death by hanging thinks possibly he can conjur up some sympathy with his public confession. Religion has cheated people by teaching all they have to do is "confess.

Hope I don't see this movie but it is tough to resist not seeing a movie under so much discussion. Seems mighty close to someone wishing to see an execution yet knowing it will be gross beyond measure.

I have always prefered gratuitous sex over gratuitous violence in film.

The only way i could consider gratuitous sex not to be an oxymoron would be in a situation in which one is too exhausted to remember about getting it up . . .

That's what the exercisa lingua is for.

Does Mary or any of the girls in "Passion" give us any skin?

And on a lighter note . . .

Always hoped that i'd be an apostle
Knew that i could make if i tried
Then when we retire, we can write the gospels
So they'll all talk about us when we've died

Look at all my trials and tribulations
Sinking in a gentle pool of wine
Don't disturb me now, i can see the answers
Till this evening is this morning life is fine . . .

-- Jesus Christ Superstar

I agree with edgar. Except I prefer gratuitous sex over meaningful violence. Needless to say, I have no intention of seeing Mel's film.

I'm just interested to know whether you are on record as protesting to children viewing violent movies in general, or whether that is just another convenient angle for attacking this specific movie for other unwritten reasons.

Here we go again -- just trying to pick and argument or do you actually have something significant to say? I've already stated I didn't agree with children watching R rated violent movies. The fact that because of the subject matter, parents would specifically take their children to this film is extremely questionable. You nor I have any power to encourage or divert them and certainly not in this forum. The horse did die.

Also, why so mysterious -- what "unwritten" reasons? Are we now psychic?

Scrat, I just finished reading through your last few posts, which you direct at LW. First, I ought to say that I find you to be excessively persistent in your pursuit of virtually meaningless points. Most often you seem to want to embarrass your interlocutor by extracting an admission of his having said something that may be inconsistent with some previous statement.

Inconsistency is not really such a bad thing. How can anyone express opinions day after day in a forum like A2K and not say things that will at least seem inconsistent with some previous statement? Or how can anyone recall every post they have made so as to offer proof of having been consistent? Sometimes we seem inconsistent because a line of thought used previously does not fit a new situation, even if one having your turn of mind thinks it ought to.

It is also true that we all sometimes change our minds about something.

Although I have occasionally agreed with you, I think that most of the time, you are hammering away at the inconsequential with what you think is a 16 pound sledge. In reality, most of us who read your posts know you are using a tack hammer.

LW, I tend to agree with Edgar that Mel was, in the beginning, out to make a film that would express his religious beliefs, which he considers to be the one true way, and which he thinks is not being heard. As Edgar points out, in the long lead-up to the films release, there was a general belief that it would tank. My impression is that Gibson kept saying that he didn't care, all he wanted was the chance to present the passion the way the Catholic Church did when it was telling the truth back before Vatican 2. At some point it became clear that the film would be supported by conservative Christians, which brightened things for Mr.G. As I say this is my impression. I do not follow film news as closely as you do, so you may be correct in thinking that Gibson always expected to cash in on the thing. As for giving the money to charity as evidence of religious sincerity, that criteria is about half out the window these days. Many conservative Christians believe that God rewards them with material riches for their faithfulness. It's sort of like, "I just got a new SUV. God must love me."

Of course, there is no accounting for what people will do or say in the name of religion, patriotism, truth, goodness, beauty or any other virtue.