Messages

Because people are too big-headed, want to control and have an opinion, and most of all, people don't want to be generic. The same, everyone following one instrument, never sounds right alone, the want to try different instruments. It is a bigger goal in life to make it more complicated, and complex. Some people simply can't live without confliction, for some it is there drive, and for other's it's there defense. Well, that's how I see it, not an expert, just thinking merely.  

Dogma was a good movie![][][]

quote:It is just another Holywood movie that is trying to make a splash over, trying all the possible ways to be the greates hit... There is no spirituality in the movie, nothing about the teaching of Christ. And Mel is trying hard to affect people by pouring out as much blood as he can. Mel would better keep on playing in movies such as "what women want", as a funy jerk, rather than trying to address some issues related to his pious (?) attitude. It looks as just another one of these "bloody movies", such as pulp fiction, etc...

For one after witnessing people quietly watching the movie, silence during the whole movie and applauding in the end showed quite a bit of spirituality from the people, power of belief is spirituality. And yes there were exerts of his teaching but only pertaining to his crucifixion, it's no point to show anything else but that one aspect, unless you have the money,  you can't really complain. Sorry, but it wasn't a Hollywood movie, nothing about this movie was at all Hollywood, for 1 the hero dies, and 2,  no sexual exploitation. You can speculate all you, but that fact is this is just an opinion of your's but no real depictions or  observations of others/ I've asked people how they felt and what they felt, I myself was agnostic and even I felt some spiritual rude-awakenings from the film, I chose to let the ego go and watch and listen. The movie is now a the record-holder for single day debut.

Mel Gibson has been in many serious films, to "brave heart" and yes the first "MadMax" wasn't a happy goofy Mel. It was pretty serious, along with the movie "The man without a face." He's a versatile actor who can pull off any role, but, this wasn't a role he was in, so I see no reason to bash his acting ability or throwing his past acts into the fry. He's a great director. It was his movie, his money and his choice to do Christ which he's been working on for quiet sometime, to me that shows conviction and dedication. Mel Gibson does not need the popularity nor the richest, he has often visited troubled youths and has given many donations, this is just a misconception of stars. They are not all the same, Mel, for has been married to the same woman for over twenty years, and he has several kids with her. An actually pulp fiction was worse because it was senseless violence with no point, unless you argued about the violence in those movies you cannot argue the blood-shed in this film. Now you say substitute violent movie of Christ to another violent sacrifice of a martyred saint Barthelmey, and being skinned alive sounds much more then what I saw in this movie. I won't deny that it was intense, but I truly believe it was necessary, I'm judging this on the reactions after the film. I still can't get the film out of my head, but I only remember him praying for the one's who beat him senselessly. That in itself whether you believe in the story or not has quite an impact. I agree that other stories of religion should be told, not that many have, they are all inaccurate classics.

quote:So another person died because of religion... or because of the movie business..? How many died and were persecuted because of religion? How many ran away during the Reform and the Counter Reform? Why not make a movie of the martyr of St. Barthelmey being skinned off by the Catholic Church ? How many died because children and teenagers are trying to do the same as what they see in movies? Enough of these things!

Every leader whom martyred themselves for a belief, dies, and yes their story should always be told so that they didn't die for nothing and that their cause is not lost. If you died for a cause would you not want to see the cause carried out, If you don't believe it fine, but there are many who do. But, you are arguing invalid points my friend, it obscuring to the "what if" and question with a question, and why not this way. It is as simple as he chose to do this film this way, it was his passion, he felt he was guided who am I to argue or to say he is wrong. No one has that power. And this has nothing to do with the film, these are just different avenues and routes less traveled. If you want to St. Barthelmey story to be told, no offence but you pay for it, and get ready to hear from the Catholics. It's a lot easier said then done, sure you can say all this on the net, but could actually do what Mel did, and risk your career in Hollywood? And trust me, had this film flopped it would have been a different story.
Mel is not basking in the glory of his film, he didn't want this to be a Hollywood movie. Mel is not of E with other people on the read carpet bragging about his film, I have only seen him defend the film at least a dozen times
                        

quote:Enough of blood being poured in the name of religion or in the name of movies? What is Mel trying to revive? It is time for violence to be abolished and time to clean up and make a fresh start.

Revive, violence is a brutal part of life, it has always been around, and I highly doubt it's going to end anytime soon.

quote:All this, if it happened at all, happened 2,000 years ago, it is time to move on guys and gals! We are in the XXIst century, time to look into the future not into the dark and bloody past!

May the Light be you! and abolishes all violence on this planet! and on the screen!

It is a story that was told, whether fiction or fact that is up to the viewer to behold.   A movie like this, if you put yourself in Christ place, may end the need for violence, this is just a speculations on my part, but to know anyone's pain can lead to understanding. To me this movie was more like mob-mentality, and the devotion of a kindred spirit. Sorry if I misinterpreted your words. You bring out interesting points even distractions. I respect your view, forgive if I came off too brazen, being new makes react a little driven.

Here's another interesting tidbit concerning the actor whom played Jesus, his initials are J.C. and he's 33, weird coincidence, but I read nothing into it, just interesting.

Yes, anti-Semitism, but if you seen the movie then you would know people were looking for reasons to refuse it. It's simple a biblical presentation of crucifixion of Christ. A look into the past, if certain jews, (few circulating complaints) were fighting over the meaning, and the jews depiction and involvement in the story, then they are fighting the religion, the belief and the biblical reference, for that is what the religion preaches. History has never been candy-coated before, why should this religious film be any different. Also the gratuitous violence, very contradicting coming from Hollywood, the same people who made violent and graphing war films, adding KillBill and PulpFiction. The news shows more carnage then anything ever being presented on Christ, gees, look at 911. This film is being picked on, more so then others. It's not really jews that are mad, it's commercial jews who have no compassion for the film, I believe. It was supposed to be extreme to the point of overwhelming tears, it was supposed to be realistic and I think they were even holding back on that aspect. I din't turn my head for a minute because you have honor that sacrifice and bravery. If it is yoo much for one to handle, then I have to say they are too weak. This movie wasn't about senseless violense in most films, but the passion of Christ as the title implies.


It's divided by political stand-points and critical opinions, but the story is accurate the same as "Schindler's List" was, but you didn't hear Germans protesting about being the "bad guy" it's part of an ugly history that shows the ignorance, envy and arrogance of man. All parts of history has their ugly side, but history must be told in the way it happened so that it is not repeated. But yeah, those are the two main concerns of the movie. Gibson was even being criticize for changing a Jewish character was it Simpson or Samson, I forget, anyway, he changed his character to be more of a hero then what he originally was, taken away from the original story in order to appease Jewish critic and audience. Also, before the movie was to be released months ago, Gibson was already receiving highly critical spurning insults of his film, because an early draft was unofficially released, it wasn't the final cut. Yet, they took it and ran with it, starting controversy during production. They pretty much out to get the movie from the get go, other reasons may surface, but those two complaints take precedence. You are supposed to learn from the film, and not be offended by it.[^][]

who knows, perhaps she truelly believed in what she was watching and was ready to give her life to god, fate don't know. The power of mental belief can by a strange yet powerful thing. Or she couldn't endure his sufferening anymore, it is said that the movie, and I've felt this myself, can give an intensified sense that you are in Christ's place and that you are being tortured and persecuted along with him.  As I said mental belief can be a strange and powerful thing. Timing is weird too, seems like fate to me. Maybe to the woman it wasn't just a movie, but a gateway, and opening, a truth, or her final end that she wanted.  To her perhaps, it was something a little more, anwsers she was seeking or just high cholesterol.

Controversy is outlandish, I've seen more blood-shed in a video game. People are picking on this film because it's involvement with religion that is all. People fear what they can't control or understand. People who are complaining are missing the deeper meaning out of arrogancy, put the pride away for day. I think it's more an attack on religion then anything, people don't want to change out of arrogance and stubborness so they try to ruin a good decent thing. People are having too much fun being bad, religion means order and rules and that what they fear. Hollywood makes more money on senseless mindless violence and sex, but they fear this movie can change it, not knowing their controversy has made it 3rd movie in history to have the biggest opening, it made 26 mil. That's saying something, you can't stop a miracle I suppose.  It was destine to be seen and brought to light. Again the timing, it just seems like it was meant to be. I've seen other religious films depicting the story of christ and not nearly have the resentment of this movie. It's a different time, and resentful emotions. Everyone is stubborn just like I was.

Hey, I'm new here[], but I do have a simple question. Trying to find ties I suppose. [] I heard reference to Jesus being accept as a prophet in Muslim religion, which I already knew. But what I don't know is, does Christian religion accept Prophet Muhammad, as a prophet? Also, why is Muhammad considered the last prophet? I'm just a humble person simply seeking answers and insights. Many people believe Martin Luther and MalcolmX were prophets, not sure, but they were martyred. So what would they be seen as in the light of religious beliefs of Muslims?[?]