The crucifixion had been prophesied for hundreds of years; his followers and family knew what had to happen. I'm sure they were distraught at his treatment, but the movie painted it to seem deliberately worse. My dad and I were particularly concerned with the way the Roman soldiers were portrayed - bloodthirsty, enjoying the beating. This is inferring too much; Pilate and his men had no desire to decimate the man - but rather an obligation. I can't imagine that some people brought their kids to this show; I would have walked them all out at the first scourging scene, which for me was worse than the actual crucifixion.
The crucifixion had been prophesied for hundreds of years; his followers and family knew what had to happen. I'm sure they were distraught at his treatment, but the movie painted it to seem deliberately worse. My dad and I were particularly concerned with the way the Roman soldiers were portrayed - bloodthirsty, enjoying the beating. This is inferring too much; Pilate and his men had no desire to decimate the man - but rather an obligation. I can't imagine that some people brought their kids to this show; I would have walked them all out at the first scourging scene, which for me was worse than the actual crucifixion.
These are fine points, without going back in time, there's no way of knowing how the soldiers.................
....wait a minute! what about the whole reed/purple robe/"hail Ceasar!" thing? It sounds like things might have gotten out of hand. (I acutally just remembered that---not trying to be a smart ass)
I let my kids see it (but then they've seen Aliens too), but I wouldn't have if I'd known about the Satan thing. Pretty creepy.
"The greatest thing the Devil ever did was convince the world he didn't exist."
-- Kevin Spacey in The Usual Suspects.
That is actually a rewording of a Franz Kafka quote. It is from the Great Wall of China . . . a specific translation of it.
there are many great quotes from that text including:
"# 52
There is only a spiritual world; what we call the physical world is the evil in the spiritual one, and what we call evil is only a necessary moment in our endless development.
* * *
In a light that is fierce and strong one can see the world dissolve
. To weak eyes it beccomes solid, to weaker eyes it shows fists, before still weaker eyes it feels ashamed and smites down him who dares to look at it"
"# 76
Truth is indivisible, therefore cannot know itself; the man who desires to know it must be false."
"# 89
For the last time -Psychology!"
and these last two are my favorites:
"# 99
You can hold back from the suffering of the world, you have free permission to do so and it is in accordance with your nature, but perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering that you could have avoided."
and the semi famous:
"# 104.5
You do not need to leave your room. Remain sitting at your table and listen. Do not even listen, simply wait. Do nat even wait, be quite still and solitary. The world will freely offer itself to you to be unmasked, it has no choice, it will roll in extasy at your feet."
now make note: Kafka was very much a profoundly spiritual Jew!!
and what seems simply literal in any of his quotes is complex and paradoxical . . . like the parables of hasidic masters or even Zen koans . . . or even, Jesus' parables (who also was a spiritual Jew)
From Garth Franklin's review over at Dark Horizons:
Quote:
The first half whilst convoluted and a little confusing for a non-Christian, has interesting elements and themes of betrayal, tragedy, love, etc. and visually changes scenery and look relatively frequently. Then comes the second hour which is where the tedium sets in. Is the violence brutal, yes. Overdone? To be sure. Shocking? Funnily enough no. The term subtlety isn't in Gibson's vocabulary, thus the violence is so graphic and constant that one becomes essentially desensitised to it - once that happens the rest of the film can be seen for what it is - a self-indulgent yawner. We know Jesus gets horrifically beaten by two Romans - why do we need to see it drawn out to ten minutes. We know he's forced to carry his crucifixion cross up the hill - so why then does Gibson have to spend a full half hour filming Jesus shuffling, tripping, being harassed by the guards, shuffling, tripping, harassed, shuffling, tripping, etc. over and over?
In a two hour movie a good 2/3 of the last hour could've been removed or better yet replaced with a better examination of the characters and Jesus' spiritual message whilst still leaving in violence and brutality cut in such a way that would've had even more impact than the gratuitous gore fest currently has. By taking the far easier option of displaying excessive violence than exploring spirituality, Gibson essentially lost the message he's trying to convey - so while we see what happened to Jesus, we understand very little about why. That leaves us as an audience bored rather than enlightened. This most human of tales is sadly lacking humanity.
One thing just strikes me (besides the whips of my sins!). . . why were so many churches and Christian groups so willing to fully embrace this movie before thay had seen it?
In my neighborhood a local church printed up huge expensive flyers and planned on screening the film . . . in fact they did screen it .
Is that fact that Jewish groups thought it objectionable in any way, perhaps subconsciously, a part of the movie's appeal to Christians . . . do they thus see it as being more "authentic"
I mean, there have been many many religious films made . . . many based on the life of Jesus and none of these resulted in this church-renting-screening mania? and before they even saw the film?!?!
I wonder how many of these Church leaders regretted it after the first twenty minutes of the whip?!
What you guys are seeing here is something of a reaction to a supply shock for an underepresented market. Christians have been long denegrated and marginalized to such and extent by the large conglomerate media, that traditional marketing theory has overlooked that market segment---at least until about three weeks ago.
What you guys missed, with the LOTR run up to release, was a groundswell of approval in the Christian community (yes, even before its release). Remember, there isn't a single curse, tit, ass, or sex scene in the entire trilogy--and this franchise . . .
[checks boxofficemojo.com]
. . . is almost up to 3 billion dollars worldwide, and that is without merchandising and dvd sales. As a Christian talking to a lot of other Christians, there was a collective sigh of relief--finally something other than Eisner's crack-induced manure that I could let my kids watch. With the release of The Passion it was much the same thing.
Christians have to wade through a sewer in order to find anything that is watchable at all. I rarely go into Blockbuster---when I do get something, I've checked IMDB to see if there is anything obviously wrong with it; most of the time though, you end up with the everpresent sporkfu<king as good clean fun or a supporting homosexual character that is there---not to move the story along---but to push an agenda.
Christians aren't any more stupid or narrow any more than anyone else---they're sick of the perversion, sick of the sermonizing by the hugely overepresented Gay element---tired of the Judy Dench style "she was the love of my life and those narrow minded Christian pigs wouldn't let me get married" homilies.
Helllloooooooo???? Maybe we could target that market and not piss it completly off?
Maybe?
The answer since Porky's III and Fast Times at Ridgemont High has been: No, no, and hell no. You want The Hunger fine. You want incest? fine. Nick Nolte in U-turndoing his daughter doggy style? You got it. Wo hu cang long great prduction value, very entertaining---but---loverboy just has to slide his hand down Ziyi Zhang's skirt and goes for broke. Why? you just made a movie I wont let my nine-year-old watch. No DVD sale for you. The list is endless.
What is erie is all the screaming for the people who have been telling Christians for decades "hey if you don't like it, don't watch it." It is surreal to hear all the racket this movie is causing.
But then maybe all the screaming is coming from Dawn of the Dead playing in the next theater over.
One thing just strikes me (besides the whips of my sins!). . . why were so many churches and Christian groups so willing to fully embrace this movie before thay had seen it?
In my neighborhood a local church printed up huge expensive flyers and planned on screening the film . . . in fact they did screen it .
Is that fact that Jewish groups thought it objectionable in any way, perhaps subconsciously, a part of the movie's appeal to Christians . . . do they thus see it as being more "authentic"
I mean, there have been many many religious films made . . . many based on the life of Jesus and none of these resulted in this church-renting-screening mania? and before they even saw the film?!?!
I wonder how many of these Church leaders regretted it after the first twenty minutes of the whip?!
With all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about.
The JESUS film in the eighties has been embraced and shown to BILLIONS of people across the planet with active church assistance. Churches regularly rent theatres on Saturday mornings for kids whenever the newest VeggieTales episode comes out.
And, as mentioned in the earliest pages of this thread, I had the opportunity to see the film at a local Pastor's screening (even though I'm not a Pastor). Such screenings were held across North America and were not secret, but widely reported on. Gibson and his team did a great job of bringing the clergy onside with the release. To say Pastors in general didn't know what the film contained is, at best, inaccurate.
And in case you also aren't aware, this is hardly unique. When Dreamworks was in production with The Prince of Egypt animated film, they showed it to Christian clergy and incorporated changes into the script based on feedback.
And nobody accused Spielberg of being an anti-Semite.
Just because you aren't in the loop doesn't mean the loop doesn't exist.
When Dreamworks was in production with The Prince of Egypt animated film, they showed it to Christian clergy and incorporated changes into the script based on feedback.
And nobody accused Spielberg of being an anti-Semite.
What you guys are seeing here is something of a reaction to a supply shock for an underepresented market. Christians have been long denegrated and marginalized to such and extent by the large conglomerate media, that traditional marketing theory has overlooked that market segment---at least until about three weeks ago.
What you guys missed, with the LOTR run up to release, was a groundswell of approval in the Christian community (yes, even before its release). Remember, there isn't a single curse, tit, ass, or sex scene in the entire trilogy--and this franchise . . .
[checks boxofficemojo.com]
. . . is almost up to 3 billion dollars worldwide, and that is without merchandising and dvd sales. As a Christian talking to a lot of other Christians, there was a collective sigh of relief--finally something other than Eisner's crack-induced manure that I could let my kids watch. With the release of The Passion it was much the same thing.
Christians have to wade through a sewer in order to find anything that is watchable at all. I rarely go into Blockbuster---when I do get something, I've checked IMDB to see if there is anything obviously wrong with it; most of the time though, you end up with the everpresent sporkfu<king as good clean fun or a supporting homosexual character that is there---not to move the story along---but to push an agenda.
Christians aren't any more stupid or narrow any more than anyone else---they're sick of the perversion, sick of the sermonizing by the hugely overepresented Gay element---tired of the Judy Dench style "she was the love of my life and those narrow minded Christian pigs wouldn't let me get married" homilies.
Helllloooooooo???? Maybe we could target that market and not piss it completly off?
Maybe?
The answer since Porky's III and Fast Times at Ridgemont High has been: No, no, and hell no. You want The Hunger fine. You want incest? fine. Nick Nolte in U-turndoing his daughter doggy style? You got it. Wo hu cang long great prduction value, very entertaining---but---loverboy just has to slide his hand down Ziyi Zhang's skirt and goes for broke. Why? you just made a movie I wont let my nine-year-old watch. No DVD sale for you. The list is endless.
What is erie is all the screaming for the people who have been telling Christians for decades "hey if you don't like it, don't watch it." It is surreal to hear all the racket this movie is causing.
But then maybe all the screaming is coming from Dawn of the Dead playing in the next theater over.
I think that we understand your views on film: Nudity bad. Sex bad. Gays bad. Violence OK.
My problem is that you represent these views as being Christian. I don't agree. Yours is a political and social ethos. Some Christians share it, others don't. But it is not per se Christian and you do a disservice to Christianity by representing it this way.
I think that we understand your views on film: Nudity bad. Sex bad. Gays bad. Violence OK.
My problem is that you represent these views as being Christian. I don't agree. Yours is a political and social ethos. Some Christians share it, others don't. But it is not per se Christian and you do a disservice to Christianity by representing it this way.
Look, I'm willing to let my kids watch Aliens, Black Hawk Down, Open Range bla, bla bla. Life IS violent, but quite frankly, it is also alot of other things. Some things I'm willing to didactically let in as ambient, others I am not.
I'm not telling other Christians what to do or binding their consciences.Let each man be convinced in his own mind......
Comments
No let's go back on the topic for people who are interested.
Originally posted by fred_lj
......how long can we draw out the procession to Golgotha? Entirely melodramatic
The "stations of the Cross" is one of those Roman Catholic "things"; I would have been suprised if he had left it out.
......making the Gospel into a 2-hour gory, mushy-emotional fest is inappropriate.
[/B]
As opposed to the cheery, ironic accounts of the crucifixion in the Bible? What else would the crucifixtion have been for his family and followers?
Also, I can't decide what to watch next, I'm torn between Ravenous, U-turn, Perry Ferrell's The Gift or The House of Yes. Suggestions?
Originally posted by fred_lj
The crucifixion had been prophesied for hundreds of years; his followers and family knew what had to happen. I'm sure they were distraught at his treatment, but the movie painted it to seem deliberately worse. My dad and I were particularly concerned with the way the Roman soldiers were portrayed - bloodthirsty, enjoying the beating. This is inferring too much; Pilate and his men had no desire to decimate the man - but rather an obligation. I can't imagine that some people brought their kids to this show; I would have walked them all out at the first scourging scene, which for me was worse than the actual crucifixion.
These are fine points, without going back in time, there's no way of knowing how the soldiers.................
....wait a minute! what about the whole reed/purple robe/"hail Ceasar!" thing? It sounds like things might have gotten out of hand. (I acutally just remembered that---not trying to be a smart ass)
I let my kids see it (but then they've seen Aliens too), but I wouldn't have if I'd known about the Satan thing. Pretty creepy.
kooks. Jesus died so you could beat the shit out of each other.
Satan... hehe... like it even exists.
-- Kevin Spacey in The Usual Suspects.
Does he sit on a throne of skulls with fire shooting out of his eyes?
Do angels fly around in the clouds too?
Originally posted by chu_bakka
ooooo.. I'm scared.
Does he sit on a throne of skulls with fire shooting out of his eyes?
Kevin Spacey?
Originally posted by dmz
"The greatest thing the Devil ever did was convince the world he didn't exist."
-- Kevin Spacey in The Usual Suspects.
That is actually a rewording of a Franz Kafka quote. It is from the Great Wall of China . . . a specific translation of it.
there are many great quotes from that text including:
"# 52
There is only a spiritual world; what we call the physical world is the evil in the spiritual one, and what we call evil is only a necessary moment in our endless development.
* * *
In a light that is fierce and strong one can see the world dissolve
. To weak eyes it beccomes solid, to weaker eyes it shows fists, before still weaker eyes it feels ashamed and smites down him who dares to look at it"
"# 76
Truth is indivisible, therefore cannot know itself; the man who desires to know it must be false."
"# 89
For the last time -Psychology!"
and these last two are my favorites:
"# 99
You can hold back from the suffering of the world, you have free permission to do so and it is in accordance with your nature, but perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering that you could have avoided."
and the semi famous:
"# 104.5
You do not need to leave your room. Remain sitting at your table and listen. Do not even listen, simply wait. Do nat even wait, be quite still and solitary. The world will freely offer itself to you to be unmasked, it has no choice, it will roll in extasy at your feet."
now make note: Kafka was very much a profoundly spiritual Jew!!
and what seems simply literal in any of his quotes is complex and paradoxical . . . like the parables of hasidic masters or even Zen koans . . . or even, Jesus' parables (who also was a spiritual Jew)
The Jean-Paul Sartre Cookbook
by Alastair Sutherland
From Free Agent March 1987 (a Portland Oregon alternative newspaper).
Republished in the Utne Reader Nov./Dec. 1993.
We have been lucky to discover several previously lost diaries of French
philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre stuck in between the cushions of our office sofa.
These diaries reveal a young Sartre obsessed not with the void, but with food.
Apparently Sartre, before discovering philosophy had hoped to write "a cookbook
that will put to rest all notions of flavor forever." The diaries are excerpted
here for your perusal.
October 3
Spoke with Camus today about my cookbook. Though he has never actually eaten,
he gave me much encouragement. I rushed home immediately to begin work. How
excited I am! I have begun my formula for a Denver omelet.
October 4
Still working on the omelet. There have been stumbling blocks. I keep creating
omelets one after another, like soldiers marching into the sea, but each one
seems empty, hollow, like stone. I want to create an omelet that expresses the
meaninglessness of existence, and instead they taste like cheese. I look at
them on the plate, but they do not look back. Tried eating them with the lights
off. It did not help. Malraux suggested paprika.
October 6
I have realized that the traditional omelet form (eggs and cheese) is bourgeois.
Today I tried making one out of cigarettes, some coffee, and four tiny stones.
I fed it to Malraux, who puked. I am encouraged, but my journey is still long.
October 10
I find myself trying ever more radical interpretations of traditional dishes, in
an effort to somehow express the void I feel so acutely. Today I tried this
recipe:
Tuna Casserole Ingredients: 1 large casserole dish
Place the casserole dish in a cold oven. Place a chair facing the oven and sit
in it forever. Think about how hungry you are. When night falls, do not turn
on the light. While a void is expressed in the recipe, I am struck by its
inapplicability to the bourgeois lifestyle. How can the eater recognize that the
food denied him is a tuna casserole and not some other dish? I am becoming more
and more frustrated.
October 25
I have been forced to abandon the project of producing an entire cookbook.
Rather, I now seek a single recipe which will, by itself, embody the plight of
man in a world ruled by an unfeeling God, as well as providing the eater with at
least one ingredient from each of the four basic food groups. To this end, I
purchased six hundred pounds of foodstuffs from the corner grocery and locked
myself in the kitchen, refusing to admit anyone. After several weeks of work, I
produced a recipe calling for two eggs, half a cup of flour, four tons of beef,
and a leek. While this is a start, I am afraid I still have much work ahead.
November 15
Today, I made a Black Forest cake out of five pounds of cherries and a live
beaver, challenging the very definition of the word cake. I was very pleased.
Malraux said he admired it greatly, but could not stay for dessert. Still, I
feel that this may be my most profound achievement yet, and have resolved to
enter it in the Betty Crocker Bake-Off.
November 30
Today was the day of the Bake-Off. Alas, things did not go as I had hoped.
During the judging, the beaver became agitated and bit Betty Crocker on the
wrist. The beaver's powerful jaws are capable of felling blue spruce in less
than ten minutes and proved, needless to say, more than a match for the tender
limbs of America's favorite homemaker. I only got third place. Moreover, I am
now the subject of a rather nasty lawsuit.
December 1
I have been gaining twenty-five pounds a week for two months, and I am now
experiencing light tides. It is stupid to be so fat. My pain and ultimate
solitude are still as authentic as they were when I was thin, but seem to
impress girls far less. From now on, I will live on cigarettes and black
coffee.
You should check out Marrinettis's Futurist Cookbook . . . it is like that only he was serious!
funny Sartre stuff . . .
but isn't Sartre always funny?!?!
The first half whilst convoluted and a little confusing for a non-Christian, has interesting elements and themes of betrayal, tragedy, love, etc. and visually changes scenery and look relatively frequently. Then comes the second hour which is where the tedium sets in. Is the violence brutal, yes. Overdone? To be sure. Shocking? Funnily enough no. The term subtlety isn't in Gibson's vocabulary, thus the violence is so graphic and constant that one becomes essentially desensitised to it - once that happens the rest of the film can be seen for what it is - a self-indulgent yawner. We know Jesus gets horrifically beaten by two Romans - why do we need to see it drawn out to ten minutes. We know he's forced to carry his crucifixion cross up the hill - so why then does Gibson have to spend a full half hour filming Jesus shuffling, tripping, being harassed by the guards, shuffling, tripping, harassed, shuffling, tripping, etc. over and over?
In a two hour movie a good 2/3 of the last hour could've been removed or better yet replaced with a better examination of the characters and Jesus' spiritual message whilst still leaving in violence and brutality cut in such a way that would've had even more impact than the gratuitous gore fest currently has. By taking the far easier option of displaying excessive violence than exploring spirituality, Gibson essentially lost the message he's trying to convey - so while we see what happened to Jesus, we understand very little about why. That leaves us as an audience bored rather than enlightened. This most human of tales is sadly lacking humanity.
In my neighborhood a local church printed up huge expensive flyers and planned on screening the film . . . in fact they did screen it .
Is that fact that Jewish groups thought it objectionable in any way, perhaps subconsciously, a part of the movie's appeal to Christians . . . do they thus see it as being more "authentic"
I mean, there have been many many religious films made . . . many based on the life of Jesus and none of these resulted in this church-renting-screening mania? and before they even saw the film?!?!
I wonder how many of these Church leaders regretted it after the first twenty minutes of the whip?!
What you guys missed, with the LOTR run up to release, was a groundswell of approval in the Christian community (yes, even before its release). Remember, there isn't a single curse, tit, ass, or sex scene in the entire trilogy--and this franchise . . .
[checks boxofficemojo.com]
. . . is almost up to 3 billion dollars worldwide, and that is without merchandising and dvd sales. As a Christian talking to a lot of other Christians, there was a collective sigh of relief--finally something other than Eisner's crack-induced manure that I could let my kids watch. With the release of The Passion it was much the same thing.
Christians have to wade through a sewer in order to find anything that is watchable at all. I rarely go into Blockbuster---when I do get something, I've checked IMDB to see if there is anything obviously wrong with it; most of the time though, you end up with the everpresent sporkfu<king as good clean fun or a supporting homosexual character that is there---not to move the story along---but to push an agenda.
Christians aren't any more stupid or narrow any more than anyone else---they're sick of the perversion, sick of the sermonizing by the hugely overepresented Gay element---tired of the Judy Dench style "she was the love of my life and those narrow minded Christian pigs wouldn't let me get married" homilies.
Helllloooooooo???? Maybe we could target that market and not piss it completly off?
Maybe?
The answer since Porky's III and Fast Times at Ridgemont High has been: No, no, and hell no. You want The Hunger fine. You want incest? fine. Nick Nolte in U-turndoing his daughter doggy style? You got it. Wo hu cang long great prduction value, very entertaining---but---loverboy just has to slide his hand down Ziyi Zhang's skirt and goes for broke. Why? you just made a movie I wont let my nine-year-old watch. No DVD sale for you. The list is endless.
What is erie is all the screaming for the people who have been telling Christians for decades "hey if you don't like it, don't watch it." It is surreal to hear all the racket this movie is causing.
But then maybe all the screaming is coming from Dawn of the Dead playing in the next theater over.
Originally posted by pfflam
One thing just strikes me (besides the whips of my sins!). . . why were so many churches and Christian groups so willing to fully embrace this movie before thay had seen it?
In my neighborhood a local church printed up huge expensive flyers and planned on screening the film . . . in fact they did screen it .
Is that fact that Jewish groups thought it objectionable in any way, perhaps subconsciously, a part of the movie's appeal to Christians . . . do they thus see it as being more "authentic"
I mean, there have been many many religious films made . . . many based on the life of Jesus and none of these resulted in this church-renting-screening mania? and before they even saw the film?!?!
I wonder how many of these Church leaders regretted it after the first twenty minutes of the whip?!
With all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about.
The JESUS film in the eighties has been embraced and shown to BILLIONS of people across the planet with active church assistance. Churches regularly rent theatres on Saturday mornings for kids whenever the newest VeggieTales episode comes out.
And, as mentioned in the earliest pages of this thread, I had the opportunity to see the film at a local Pastor's screening (even though I'm not a Pastor). Such screenings were held across North America and were not secret, but widely reported on. Gibson and his team did a great job of bringing the clergy onside with the release. To say Pastors in general didn't know what the film contained is, at best, inaccurate.
And in case you also aren't aware, this is hardly unique. When Dreamworks was in production with The Prince of Egypt animated film, they showed it to Christian clergy and incorporated changes into the script based on feedback.
And nobody accused Spielberg of being an anti-Semite.
Just because you aren't in the loop doesn't mean the loop doesn't exist.
Originally posted by Frank777
When Dreamworks was in production with The Prince of Egypt animated film, they showed it to Christian clergy and incorporated changes into the script based on feedback.
And nobody accused Spielberg of being an anti-Semite.
Sounds about right....
Originally posted by dmz
What you guys are seeing here is something of a reaction to a supply shock for an underepresented market. Christians have been long denegrated and marginalized to such and extent by the large conglomerate media, that traditional marketing theory has overlooked that market segment---at least until about three weeks ago.
What you guys missed, with the LOTR run up to release, was a groundswell of approval in the Christian community (yes, even before its release). Remember, there isn't a single curse, tit, ass, or sex scene in the entire trilogy--and this franchise . . .
[checks boxofficemojo.com]
. . . is almost up to 3 billion dollars worldwide, and that is without merchandising and dvd sales. As a Christian talking to a lot of other Christians, there was a collective sigh of relief--finally something other than Eisner's crack-induced manure that I could let my kids watch. With the release of The Passion it was much the same thing.
Christians have to wade through a sewer in order to find anything that is watchable at all. I rarely go into Blockbuster---when I do get something, I've checked IMDB to see if there is anything obviously wrong with it; most of the time though, you end up with the everpresent sporkfu<king as good clean fun or a supporting homosexual character that is there---not to move the story along---but to push an agenda.
Christians aren't any more stupid or narrow any more than anyone else---they're sick of the perversion, sick of the sermonizing by the hugely overepresented Gay element---tired of the Judy Dench style "she was the love of my life and those narrow minded Christian pigs wouldn't let me get married" homilies.
Helllloooooooo???? Maybe we could target that market and not piss it completly off?
Maybe?
The answer since Porky's III and Fast Times at Ridgemont High has been: No, no, and hell no. You want The Hunger fine. You want incest? fine. Nick Nolte in U-turndoing his daughter doggy style? You got it. Wo hu cang long great prduction value, very entertaining---but---loverboy just has to slide his hand down Ziyi Zhang's skirt and goes for broke. Why? you just made a movie I wont let my nine-year-old watch. No DVD sale for you. The list is endless.
What is erie is all the screaming for the people who have been telling Christians for decades "hey if you don't like it, don't watch it." It is surreal to hear all the racket this movie is causing.
But then maybe all the screaming is coming from Dawn of the Dead playing in the next theater over.
I think that we understand your views on film: Nudity bad. Sex bad. Gays bad. Violence OK.
My problem is that you represent these views as being Christian. I don't agree. Yours is a political and social ethos. Some Christians share it, others don't. But it is not per se Christian and you do a disservice to Christianity by representing it this way.
Originally posted by Chinney
I think that we understand your views on film: Nudity bad. Sex bad. Gays bad. Violence OK.
My problem is that you represent these views as being Christian. I don't agree. Yours is a political and social ethos. Some Christians share it, others don't. But it is not per se Christian and you do a disservice to Christianity by representing it this way.
Look, I'm willing to let my kids watch Aliens, Black Hawk Down, Open Range bla, bla bla. Life IS violent, but quite frankly, it is also alot of other things. Some things I'm willing to didactically let in as ambient, others I am not.
I'm not telling other Christians what to do or binding their consciences.Let each man be convinced in his own mind......