[tull skull]

obviously, I'm not the guy who should be offering up any nuggets of grammar gold! sorry I swear that I have seen it written this way before, though. Oh yea, that was in "tullskull's grammar nuggets of gold!"
The "the" I was referring to was the actual title of the movie. I assumed by how you had written it that it must be capitalised in the movie title and that is what you were questioning. Anyway no biggie either way.

[Kevin P]

Not meaning to minimize anything you are saying, Kevin, all good stuff there, but from what I've heard the opinions are fairly well separated.
Anti semitic, too violent, with biblically inaccurate bringing up the rear. With maybe a handful simply thinking the movie sucked. The violence and quality issues are both pretty subjective and I think deserved to be taken respectfully as one's opinion. The other two carry no weight with me and those still trying to use that attack are starting to look silly, in my  ...

Let's break down the criticisms:

#1.  Anti-Semitic:   This is crazy unless you think the Bible itself is anti-Semitic.   I think Gibson gave a valid comparison when he stated that it would be like calling Schindler's List "anti-German".   I didn't have any desire to go out and commit some random act of violence against Germans after seeing Schindler's List.

#2.  Gratuitous Violence: I wouldn't have any problem with anyone complaining about the violence.  That is a given and the graphical nature is something that some people would just rather not see.  I respect and appreciate that.    It isn't graphical violence just for the sake of glorifying violence though.  I think there is a difference but that is another subject.

#3.  Biblical Inaccuracy: This is a weak argument and anyone who wants to check the facts can look at the source.   Was there some liberty taken with the story?.... Yes.   Was it a dramatic Hollywood departure from the original?  Nope...   I think there are more people making the argument that it is HISTORICALLY inaccurate, that it should somehow communicate what Biblical Scholars believe (which varies).   That wouldn't be the story as told by the Gospel though.  Why he cannot make a movie based upon a slice of the New Testament is beyond me.  I just cannot figure out what is so controversial about doing so.

There is also much chatter about how he spent "HIS OWN MONEY" on the project.  BIG DEAL.... whose money would you have him spend?  The taxpayers?  It looks as though he found an audience and the investment was a good one.  It usually is when you’re spending your own cash.

The biggest problem I have with most of the critics is that they are not honest about why they have a problem with the movie.  They have chosen to pick-on Gibson with all of these peripheral issues, none of which are the reason they have a problem with the movie.   If they said, "I have a problem with Christianity" I'd at least respect their forthrightness and give them some credit for understanding their own position and having the balls to speak it.   But they don't.... they attack Gibson, his family and his motives as though the man is a fruitcake and he doesn't deserve the constitutional right of free expression.

[Rob Babcock]

Using your own money (as opposed to a studio's cash) means you can do what you want without compromise.  He even went the route of independant distribution.  It's a gamble using your own money- even the richest people rarely have as deep of pockets as a large studio.  If it woulda tanked he'd have taken a bath.  Of course, it looks like it's working out just fine for him!

I suppose, Kevin P, that this film was prejudged and condemned before it was even finished by 1) people militantly opposed to Christianity and 2) people that just don't like Mel Gibson.

I'll admit that there are some movies I prejudge, as I think everyone does.  For instance, I'm not a fan of Leo Decapprio, nor of James Cameron really, so I never saw Titanic (plus, some bozo told me how it ended and ruined it for me! ).  I've went to movies I didn't really expect a lot out of sometimes and been pleasantly surprised, too.

You don't need to be a Christian to admire the quality of this movie;  I thought it was brilliant, and while I very much respect and admire Christianity, I would really be stretching it to claim even to be agnostic ( really most of the time I'd have to call myself an atheist).  Still, you don't need to believe in elves & hobbits to enjoy LotRs, why should Passion be any different?

[tull skull]

Did you guys see Gibson on the Leno show? He said that when he was trying to pitch the movie to the big boys, it took about 5 minutes before their eyes would glaze over and realised he would have to use his own money. He was pretty funny. Made some comment about all the trouble he was having was actually payback by God for Lethal Weapon III! He also was very gracious in pointing out the hipocracy of those picking on him, and from what I could gather, his comments were very well received and ringing true with the audience.

Even the liberties he took with the biblical accounts could have happened the way he portrayed them. It's not like he was trying to put a new spin on anything.

Kevin, I really enjoyed your perspectives. Have you noticed that those yappin about the historicity are well... lets just say have a fairly liberal view of the bible!

 Again, the hype seems to be fueled by what the movie is not.

[Kevin P]

Kevin, I really enjoyed your perspectives. Have you noticed that those yappin about the historicity are well... lets just say have a fairly liberal view of the bible!...

Well... I have a rather liberal view of the Bible in comparison to some.  It is kind of funny.  I took a teaching job at a private Christian school after getting out of college.   I had just finished a BS in chemistry and my wife & I had scrambled to find work in Indiana close to my mother who had been diagnosed with colon cancer.  The school was desperate for a science teacher; I was desperate to find a job.   Anyway... one of the questions that was asked during the job interview was if I was willing to teach from a creationist point of view or at least give creationism equal time.   To be honest it wasn't an issue that I had even considered.  Growing up in a secular home and going to a secular college I wasn't even aware that there was a controversy, sure... historically but not today.      Anyway... I said sure I'd give equal time without really knowing what I was getting into.  

To make a long story short I'm not quite in the bandwagon that takes everything stated in the Bible as literal truth.   Do I believe it was divinely inspired... yes.   Do I believe it tells some historical truth... absolutely.   Do I believe that Noah floated around with all the animals of the earth under his floating barn?  Let’s just say I’m skeptical.  Sure… God could have done a number of miracles to make them fit but I think it more likely that the story is a representation of oral history as know by the Jews.  Does that make it any less valuable?  I don’t think so.  I don’t demand that it be historically accurate in the same way a history book should be.  The value of the Bible is not in its accuracy of describing the date, time and absolute events.   The value is in the fundamental truths and in telling us about the nature and will of God and his relationship with us.   Jesus used parables to tell a story and make a point.  The parables where not meant to be a historical accurate portrayal of events.   They were used to make a point.  

  One of the biggest problems I had with the curriculum was that the creationist insisted that "correct science" supports creationism.   That is just a flat out untruth.   Science is about observation and what we can know about the observable universe.   It doesn't shed one bit of light on faith and the unobservable.

[tull skull]

It's funny you should mention the whole Noah story, as I was recently in contact with an old work buddy, our company was purchased and our technology was absorbed and documented, and then we were forced to train their staff in exchange for our severance. Lots of happy memories there. NOT!!!!
 Well I remember him having a buddy, this "professor" type who was a head engineer at NASA who, well lets just say had way too much time on his hands for me.
 This guy was a total "ark geek". He had actually calculated the amout of water the ark would have displaced and all kinds of stuff like that. He had some really good stuff, but I mean, if you take the professor image out of any classic movie, this guy was was the prototype!
 Anyway, he used to say stuff like," the ark had so much extra room they could have had and extra level just for basketball". He said there is a very unusual hebrew word used for window that is used maybe only one other place in the bible. Can't remember all his little facts about that, but he actually thinks that they could have had some form of electric light in there!
 Well, I don't want to change the direction of this thread, but do hope this was worth a chuckle or two!
 One man's field of skepticism is another man's field of intense study. Horray for the "ark geeks"!

I guess what I was getting at in terms af liberal scholars and the historicity of the movie is, if you think half of it is a crap, are you really arguing from a position of strength about the other?

[Kevin P]

I guess what I was getting at in terms af liberal scholars and the historicity of the movie is, if you think half of it is a crap, are you really arguing from a position of strength about the other?

Well... faith isn't about winning an argument to start with.   If there is one thing that Jesus hammered home it is the critical nature of faith.   If you need to make an argument for the Bible based upon reason alone then your headed down the wrong path to enlightenment to begin with.  

The second point I'd make is that I don't think that Genesis is crap.  I think that it tells us something about Jewish oral history and their relationship with the creator.  It tells us about how the Jews culture of the time viewed their creation.   Do I take all of it as literal truth?  Not really... I don't think that doing so is really that critical.  If you are so focused on proving this or that about the Bible you really missing the point anyway.   I don't think Jesus would be wasting his breath on these types of arguments where the truth of the matter is basically un-provable. If everything in Christianity where easily proven with observable fact it wouldn't require faith.

[Carlman]

I know I should let this die but I've been waiting for the Onion's point of view...
http://www.theonion.com/news/

[tull skull]

Kevin, since I can't hear the tone of voice your using to state your message, let me apologize anyway and say I was not trying to make any statements to offend you. Everyone sees things from their own perspective, and it takes alot of wisdom to even catch a glimpse of someone else's. I don't for a second think I have that wisdom.

I'm sorry.

I guess i had in the back of my mind the type of statements I have heard the "jesus seminar" type scholars use about biblical historicity. To me, they sound like they use a fair amount of circular reasoning. To be honest, I haven't even heard any comments about the movie's historical accuracy. I should have just left my comment at that. This is the reason why I prefer to read from the shadows. My comments are usually not worth the time it takes to read them and I don't possess the neccessary skills to communicate in an winsome manner.

I was attempting to comment about the movie, not your views. I offered the ark story hoping you would  get a grin out of it. Personally I appreciate the ark geeks who are willing to spend time to figure out how something could have happened.  

I appreciate the comments you made to me. Winning an argument can lead to losing a war, if you know what I mean. In fact, phrasing my whole statement about liberal scholars around them making an argument was poor. How about the statements they make, to me, are not from a position of strength.

The only appropriate comment I would like to make about reason and faith is that at the foundation level our faith needs to "make sense" to us. Our heart can't accept for sustained periods of time what our mind rejects. So aside from the argument aspect of the faith-reason mess, I appreciate the work that my friend's ark geek buddy is involved in, for example, because there might be just the interesting little fact in his body of study that would keep a seeker seeking. So hopefully someone who finds it worthwhile to delve into the depths of difficult issues will not use it to win the argument, so to speak , but to create interest.

Thanks to all of you for the respect you have shown me. In fact Kevin, I hope to become a customer of yours soon.

[tom1356]

Rob-
Check out a little known movie called Braveheart.  This movie he directed put him on the brink of madness.
-Eric

"brink"  ???
You havn't been paying attention.

[maxwalrath]

Some Jewish friends of mine who saw the movie said calling the movie anti-Semetic is like calling Pearl Harbor anti-Asian or Braveheart anti-British.

[nathanm]

I would disagree.  For example, the big Oscar winning "Return Of The King" I found to be extremely Anti-Orcish.  I have some Orc and half-orc, half-Wild Men friends and many of them were offended by the very bitter anti-Orc stereotypes shown in the movies.  This movie portrays them as brutal, cannibalistic and single-minded savages.  Needless to say this is not the case.  If this Jesus film of Mel Gibson's is anything like that I would say the Jews have every right to be upset as my Orc friends were over ROTK.

Some years ago I too was the victim of hurtful stereotypes from Hollywood's Hate Factory.  The movie 'Airheads' portrayed metalheads like myself as criminals who would commit terrorist acts against radio stations.  These hurtful stereotypes resulted in my being bedridden for a whole week, crying, clenching my fists and muttering to myself.

When will the hate stop in Hollywood?!

[Rob Babcock]

Perhaps if the studios were to give you a buttload of money it would ease some of your mental anguish.  It would certainly have that effect on me.

BTW, would an Orc like being treated with sensitivity?  I was sorta under the impression that an Orc would feel that was for "pussies."

[nathanm]

BTW, would an Orc like being treated with sensitivity? I was sorta under the impression that an Orc would feel that was for "pussies."

Well who could blame you for thinking that, what with so many years of Anti-Orc propaganda being fed to you by the mass media.  The truth is that Orcs, while being subjectively 'ugly' to most humans are really rather kind and quite sensitive creatures which are just misunderstood.  They are certainly not the beasts they are made out to be in the movies.  More information about the true nature of the Orc race is available from the Orc Anti-Defamation Leaque office in Mount Gundabad if anyone is interested.

[Kevin P]

tull skull:

I'm sorry I tend to go overboard once I'm in an argument.  You didn't offend me and your right about the Internet.   It is easy to misunderstand the tone of voice being used.   I am in no way offended by your comments... just the opposite.  

The only appropriate comment I would like to make about reason and faith is that at the foundation level our faith needs to "make sense" to us. Our heart can't accept for sustained periods of time what our mind rejects.

I think this is a great observation.  I don't have an answer..... the fulcrum between faith & reason is going to differ for every individual.

[bubba966]

Well, as of yesterday it passed $213,000,000!

Maybe it might actually pass the $250-$300mil mark that I figured it'd top out at...

[tull skull]

I just heard that over the weekend, 56% of all ticket sales were for the passion. That sounds crazy to me. Does anyone know where those figures could be verified? Thanks for your time for those who bother trying to find the info!

[Rob Babcock]

Yeah, I read that it outgrossed the rest of the top 12 combined.  That's some strong sales.  Whether it has "legs" I don't know.  I'd rather watch it again, though, than see "Starsky & Hutch" a second time...

[bubba966]

I just heard that over the weekend, 56% of all ticket sales were for the passion. That sounds crazy to me. Does anyone know where those figures could be verified? Thanks for your time for those who bother trying to find the info!

Try http://www.the-numbers.com

[mcrespo71]

I just saw it and while it was just so grisly, I was impressed with the movie overall.  The cinematography and musical score were very good and though it was at times just so brutal I couldn't believe it, it was an extremely powerful film.  I may go see it again- not sure.  

Michael