« Touching The Void (2003): B+ | Main | Once Upon a Time in America (1984): A- »

March 20, 2004


I haven't seen the film since it was in the theaters, but most people (including you) seem to have missed the portion at the end of the film which contradicts the idea that film says that the Jews killed Jesus. Jesus is carrying the cross between a crowd of people and various flashbacks are shown matching current and past actions. He walks past a group of Jewish men happy about the event and then shows the same people cheering as Jesus entered the town a few days earlier. If anything they are shown to be fickle. Also, when they are shown as excited about Jesus' impending death, the film flashes back to Jesus stating that some may want to take credit for his death, but that it was preordained by God. This shows that while some may want to blame others and even pretend like they were responsible, they are wrong. I'm not exactly sure why people who were so upset with the film seemed to miss that important portion of the film. Well, maybe I know...

Congratulations, you've discovered an element of the Christ story.

It was sick and bloody. What do you think, they tortured the man and hung him on the cross and it was all a big happy bloodless day?

Jesus Christ (pun intended), I'm glad that critics like you don't make historically based movies, or we'd all be in a world of hurts. Try some research next time.

I'm a Jew and maybe I'm crazy but I thought it was a good movie! I personally, having read the Gosepels (as well as Qu'ran, Book of Mormon) realized that this is actually the only New Testament marerial that was, well, Epic movie material.
I think the Old Testament has far more epic tales (not just Exodus). I would not mind a Jacob vs Laban/Esua movie (in some dead language of course [authenticity]). B-B-But what about the anti-Semitic elemets of the Passion??? I trust God will protect me. If He won't so I'll die, but at least I'll go to Heaven!

the reason the movie did not show Jesus as fallible, is because He WASN'T fallible.
if He had not been perfect, the sacrifice of His very life would not have been sufficient to forgive the world of sin.
how could a sinful sacrifice give atonement for sin?
many movies, television mini-series and plays have been made that focused on the life of Jesus. this movie focused on the torture and murder of Jesus, specifically because it had not been accurately portrayed before.
did you criticize those others for OMITTING the brutality, the REALITY of His murder?

Listen, the film was sick. end of story. I thoroughly agree with you. Going to some theater and having to sit through seeing a rather nice man being practically skinned, beaten, flogged, stoned, humiliated, and nailed to a cross for two hours isnt exactly my idea of a good film going experience. and yes, the film wanted to portray the brutality of his murder and how he made the ultimate sacrifice, but at the end of the day, people leave the theater thinking: "Goddamn, that was some pretty gruesome shit." rather than "My god, we should all aspire to be like him." the only thing the film manages to send out, is an insatiable urge to throw up or to cry. watching this film is hardship in its own right, and if thats truly was Gibson wanted than sure. he did what he wanted, he moved audiences. but at the end of the day, this film just seems like propoganda and endless preaching, and people only have to ask: "WhY?"

"but at the end of the day, this film just seems like propoganda and endless preaching, and people only have to ask: "WhY?"

Your an idiot.


If you're going to call someone names, it's a good idea to first make sure YOU'RE not making any idiotic spelling mistakes.

The comments to this entry are closed.

New Releases

© 2004-2011 LoD