VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 123[4]5 ]


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 16:02:17 02/20/04 Fri
Author: the Rhino
Subject: The Passion of the Christ

Next week marks the release of what could be the most controversial religious film since Kevin Smith’s Dogma or Martin Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ. It’s the Mel Gibson directed depiction of the last days of Jesus Christ’s life titled The Passion of the Christ. Dogma was blasted for questioning aspects of the Bible that has been deemed taboo by most religious fanatics and generally making a mockery of the Catholic Church. Temptation questioned the mental stability of Jesus and put its own spin on the story of the crucifixion. Passion is being criticized for apparently accusing the Jews of killing Christ.


Gibson seems to have a knack for spinning yarns of martyrs, as his Academy Award winning film, Braveheart was the story of a man that gave his life in the name of Scotland and its people. If you know the story of Christ, he gives his life for the sins of man. Rarely has there ever been a film associated with religion that didn’t get under someone’s skin, as the subject of Jesus Christ is as questionable as making a film associated with overtly sexual themes or taboos.


This being the case, Gibson had a hard time finding a major motion picture studio that would even touch the film. He went on to fund the film himself to the tune of $25 million, plans on releasing the film himself through his production company, Icon, and is being helped with distribution through indie stalwart, Newmarket Films. The film is expected to open on more than 2,500 screens, having the second largest opening in indie film history…all on his own dime.


When word began to leak that the film could contain anti-Semitic content, that the dialogue was spoken in Aramaic and Latin with no subtitles (which I believe is no longer the case), that Pontius Pilate was a pawn and gave the okay for the crucifixion as a way to calm down Jewish protesters and that it was graphically violent in the portrayal of Christ’s death, including a cameo by Gibson’s hands driving the nail into Jesus’s hands, people began to speculate whether Gibson had lost his mind. This could be a huge financial disaster, they said. This could sink Gibson’s credibility, they said. This could ruin the careers of the stars of the film, Jim Caviezel and Monica Belluci, they said. To say that the film has some cancerous buzz was an understatement.


Gibson went on record to state that he is not anti-Semitic and that he doesn’t feel his film depicts that. To prove his point, he has screened the film for several religious leaders of several different faiths. Some had problems with it, others did not. There is apparently one line in the film that many suggest that Gibson cut, and I paraphrase, “(Christ’s) blood will be on the hands of (the Jews) and our children.” On top of all the personal controversy, it should be noted that Gibson’s father, Hutton, is a Catholic extremist that has gone public with his views that the Jews are trying to create one religion and their own race. This doesn’t bode well for the ambitious actor/director.


It seems that you can’t go to the news stand without seeing Mel Gibson’s picture on the cover of several magazines with huge question marks as to whether he is committing career suicide. There has been so much publicity on on-line dirt sheets, on tabloids, on major magazine covers, etc. that there has been a windfall of sorts. Gibson did an emotional interview with one of America’s most respected journalists, Diane Sawyer, last Monday where he insisted that his father’s beliefs and his own weren’t one in the same and that the film’s content is pulled straight from the Good Book. He seems earnest.


So why don’t I believe him?


Here’s some simple math for you: Controversial film + Heavy Buzz = Free Publicity. As noted, Gibson has funded the film himself. If the film fails, he fails across the board. Let’s face it. It’s not going to fail.


Let’s get this straight. I believe in God. I do not believe in organized religion. Without launching into a heated debate on this issue, I just feel as if organized religion creates more hate than love in the long run, as 9/11 and the war in Iraq would dictate. I believe that you can worship God without doing so under the watchful eye of a religious leader. However, organized religion isn’t going anywhere and for that reason, there is a large, large population of Christians and Catholics to capitalize on.


Another thing I do not believe in is marketing on the name of God. There is a fad in America where you take successful advertising slogans and adapt them into religious themed slogans. For instance, “Got Milk?” is a famous slogan that has sold millions of gallons of milk throughout the US. Famous celebrities lined up to be featured in ads holding a talk glass of milk and sporting a milk moustache. It became a symbol of pop culture that is still running strong. Take “Milk” out of the equation and add “Jesus” and you’ve got the best selling “Got Jesus?” bumper sticker! The fact of the matter is, you add Jesus to something and the fanatics will pay top dollar to have it.


I believe that Gibson is fully aware of this. It has been a long time since an “accurate” depiction of Jesus’ life has hit the mainstream movie theater. With Gibson needing some new life breathed into his career, making a film that will appeal to Christians and Catholics, arguably, the largest percentage of citizens in America, promises a bona fide hit and the resurrection, so to speak, of a waning career. Putting some controversy into the film and challenging that large audience to show up and judge for themselves guarantees a large box office.


There are already reports of entire churches renting theaters for their congregations to view the film, if that tells you anything. The film is opening on a Wednesday in America, which gives it a head start on a large weekend take at the box office. In this time of war and religious controversy, this film is perfectly timed.


Isn’t it ironic?


Don’t get me wrong. Gibson may be a very religious man, as he makes it known in every interview. He may not be anti-Semitic, as he states in every interview. But Gibson has his own production company. He’s a member of Hollywood’s $25 million club. He’s a director and a producer. He’s a businessman and apparently a very savvy one at that. Making a profit is what Hollywood is all about. Far be it for me to question a man’s dignity and beliefs, but doesn’t it just seem so…convenient?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Replies:



Post a message:
This forum requires an account to post.
[ Create Account ]
[ Login ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.