Hey, I've got a question. I was wondering: Many, many people were crucified during the time of the Roman Empire. Was Jesus's pre-crucifixion torture unusual or par for the course? I don't know much about this topic on historical perspective.
However, I do know that the people walking to their own crucifixions only carried the crossbar, not the entire cross. I wish Gibson's movie was more accurate (another example: nails in wrists, not hands). I can't stand for people to walk around uneducated in their own religion, especially if these people are pushing their religion on others.
OK WHOH MISSY. I will see it tonight and tell you what i think after actually seein the movie. The Bible was not the only recource cited for the depictions in this film....many catholic, roman and Jewish scripts are cited. MR> GIBSON DID EXTENSIVE research on this movie. This movie was not made to push faith on anyone....thats a really crazy assumption. This movie is a very REAL depiction of what the last twelve hours of Christs life was like. No one will be standing at the front of the theatre doing an alter call when its done...wait I take that back.....if someone was, they arent affiliated with the movie.........Mr Gibson not only wrote produced and funded this movie but also filmed it in another country becasue he could not get a distributor or funding here in America. In interviews abotuthis movie, he spoke of feeling he needed to attend mass every day, for clensing. He also had peopletranslate the script in aramaic....as well as he filmed it in aramaic....um pretty accurate. (as well as translated it into latin) he also enlisted many catholic and Jesuit preists fo historical accuracy...This film has done his homework.
I would not , however, assume that the pre cruciifxion tortures were the norm though. Since part of the routine was the crown of thorns. and to nail a sign on top of his cross saying KING OF THE JEWS. This was all about hiumiliation. But it was part of the plan.
I think this will be an important peice of cinema in uor time. Mush like that of Schindler's List and The Wall. It will most certainly push a lot of boundries. To read the gospel about the last hours of christ is one thing, but it does not go into great detail as this movie will.
Gibson directed the film he didn't write it. Now, most people throughout the world do not recongize the nails through the wrists, but the hands. His death wasn't that unusual (Besides what Eve has already said), but his film is not based off of OUR historical records, but the Bible. Yes I am aware that was a redundent statement, but let's not tear it to shreads, you understand what it means. All of the hoopla, is from the Jewish community. Even though it say that the Jewish people crucified Christ, they feel like the writer (not Gibson) is making it look as if the killed the Messiah, when they do not feel he was the Messiah.
Gibson isn't "pushing"his religion onto others. it''s a choice you can pay 7.50 and go see it or not. Do you consider every Pagan film to be "pushing" religion on to others? It makes witchcraft look "cooler" by throwing around objects, and what nots, does that not premote it?
I'm defiantely catching this one. The violence and torture should make Miike's Audition and Ichi the Killer pale in comparison from what I have heard.
Seriously though, I do want to see what critics are all up in arms about - it is a film about a person being crucified, a very violent subject. WTF did they expect?
And yeah, crucifixtion etiquitte would require spikes through the wrist as opposed to the palm to support body weight. People were also tied with rope.
interesting point on how mass brainwashing works. the human body cannot be supported through the hands, the bones are too small and the weight of the body would rip right through them. This was brought up in the movie stigmata when Patricia Arquette's character was in church with a priest and was looking at a crucifix and then at the holes in her wrist. Also the Jews did not kill him the Romans did. The Jews merely handed him over. And like Coor said, Jews do not believe that Jesus was the Messiah, they just believe he was a prophet. I have had several Jewish friends tell me this when we got into the discussions.
and on a side note, A few years ago I was driving down Scottsville RD (the main drag in Bowling Green) when I saw a man who had a cross tied to his wrists walking up the side of he road, I almost pulled over and went off in him, cause a) the crucified only carried the crossbar as mentioned above and b) he had a wheel on the bottom of the cross. Which was almost too funny to me. How can someone be tryin to make a statement with a wheel attached making it not difficult. I'm sure the weight of the wood was a bit much but still.
If he added two words in I'd be suprised, but lets not get into the ethics, of my future career. The 1960's italian horror film, "The Church," I beleive was the first to bring up the wrists instead of the hands. Oh, if anyone haxs a copy of this film, I am HIGHLY iontrested in buying it or a copy of it.
Oh by the way...I forgot to add, (sorry about the attack but I am really into supporting this movie) crucifixion......it doesnt matter if you are tied by your wrists, nailed through your palms or hands......in that formation......you suffocate...the rib cage is stretched and the disphragm cannot support.....little known fact but true. SO christ not only bled , got whipped and was stabbed through his side. but also suffocated to death., hence the nails through the feet, so you could not stand and give any support to your lungs
Mistress Eve(L) wrote: This movie was not made to push faith on anyone....thats a really crazy assumption.
I did not mean to imply that Mel Gibson is pushing his faith on anyone. I was only referring to people in general in any religion.
Yes many people try to push their faith on others...I think its the biggest drive against christianity. Mel Gibson felt he had lost his faith and this movie restored his relationship with god (I am taking this from many interviews I have seen) If you will notice , many of the roles he has taken in the last few years have dealt with an estranged relationsip with god or some sort of religious undertone. I think he has been coming to this fath epiphany for a while......I again appluade his endevours and boldness.......I hope many follow! IN THE NAME OF RENEGADE CINEMA!
Centurion: You know the penalty laid down by Roman law for harboring a known criminal?
Matthias: No.
Centurion: Crucifixion!
Matthias: Oh.
Centurion: Nasty, eh?
Matthias: Could be worse.
Centurion: What you mean "Could be worse"?
Matthias: Well, you could be stabbed.
Centurion: Stabbed? Takes a second. Crucifixion lasts hours. It's a slow, horrible death.
Matthias: Well, at least it gets you out in the open air.
Centurion: You're weird!
Mistress Eve(L) wrote:crucifixion......in that formation......you suffocate...the rib cage is stretched and the diaphragm cannot support.....little known fact but true.
hmm I thought everyone knew that. Which is why I didn't mention it. From what I've read about this many people upon being crucified will force their bodies up to breathe and then relax, cause their backs to scrape against the wood of the cross over and over until they are completely exhausted and then the suffocation begins.
"I think the American people?I hope the American?I don't think, let me?I hope the American people trust me." GWB
I didnt know it until I took an art class in college........and we studied a lot of painting on the crucifixion and I have been a christian for a long time.
Link to a few factual errors some scholar see in the film. i think the long hair thing is a being a bit nit picky personally.
I will see the film later with Melanie and I"m trying hard to keep an open mind open it aesthetically wise. It's hard though what with Gibson running around talking about people not wanting this film to be made just because it carries a pro-christian message. Go figure, critiicize a film and it's not just a reasonable questioning of subject matter but rather a great CONSPIRACY to hold down the christian religion.
i cant believe people are this pissed over the movie, but i wont see it until sunday (no pun intented... for date) sooooooooooo ill post here then with my thoughts...
until then,remember kids, its impossible to get a 100% accurate account of what Christ went through and my brother is a one of the things ive picked up on from him iis that people do tons of research on these topics, and then fill in their own blanks... those blanks are always what people cite because they seem like new and different information but the fact is history is always biased to who tells it.
Ok... First off I will not be seeing the movie because I will ONLY nit pick for historical and biblical inaccuracies. Also if the Jewish community wants something to bitch about they could always go after the new testament which is all pretty much anti-semitic in a 'round about way. Either way the controversy will only go in Gibson's pocket. People have made GeiN knows how many movies about Jesus and at this point they're kind-of just beating it to death. I thought after Left Behind came out there would be no more Jesus movies. I was hoping it was the finale. But oh well.
i'm going to see this film very soon. what annoys me the most is that gibson took such pains to get the language accurate, but the cast is not of that heritage. i think if he had actually cast middle-eastern actors, he would have caused a much larger uproar. not that it should be the largest issue, but if he's going to go to detail ...do it right.
First...if you are gonna post about what Scholar's think, please don't be bias, and have it from a Jewish standpoint. OBVIOUSLY they are gonna nit pick the shit out of it.
Second...Junkie is right, it is impossiable to know ALL of thw DETAILS about something that happened over a thousand years ago.
Third...Directors DON'T DO CASTING! Yes, they have some power but you can't sacrifice tallent, for authenticy(sp).
It's just a movie. It's the same as the fuvking Passion plays performed for HUNDRED of years, and no one has said anything. Why is it such a big deal to go from stage to screen? because now any moron will see it.
Out of curiosity, have any of you seen Scorcese's Last Temptation of Christ or read the book? I thought that was a very interesting look at Jesus' last moments on the cross and what led up to it. Dramatic license to be sure, but it was a film that made you think and talk about religion.
I will see The Passion of the Christ, as I don't think that you can really criticize accurately something that you have not seen. All I want is a good movie. So long as that is accomplished I will be happy. Let's not forget how many people thought that Oliver Stone's JFK was "historicaly accurate." If you own it (and you should) watch it again with the commentary track and see just how much fact was mixed with "this is how if could've gone down." As was mentioned earlier, any historical account is going to have some blanks to fill in, and any film is going sacrifice some things for the sake of art or money or both.
