Gibson to Delete a Scene in 'Passion'

NY Times ^ | February 4, 2004 | SHARON WAXMAN

[AgThorn]

That's a shame ... the scene is very biblical.

Matthew 27
23 And the governor said, Why, what evil hath he done? But they cried out the more, saying, Let him be crucified. 24 When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. 25 Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. 26 Then released he Barabbas unto them: and when he had scourged Jesus, he delivered him to be crucified.

[sobieski]

Mel's comment is, of course, correct. Millions were killed b/c of Nazi racism; some of whom were Jews in concentration camps. How can he "marginalize" the Holocaust by noting that Jews were among the "untermenschen" killed by the Nazis. It would seem that Rabbi Hier is the Holocaust denier.

[Lily4Jesus]

They don't want to know the truth because the TRUTH (JESUS) will set them free. Jesus said:"I'm the Way, the Truth and the Light....."

[ItisaReligionofPeace]

Sounds like a bunch of people didn't believe in him. And they were alive when he was walking the earth. His miracles must not have seemed as miraculous to some...

[longtermmemmory]

It will be put in on the DVD. Director's cut.

[madison10]

This is so sad...bending to the whims of the Christian-hating bigot: Foxman.

[Ronin]

This is pretty sad.

I had hoped that Mel would tell Foxman and the ADL where to stuff it. But apparantly, he has knuckled under.

I repeat my contention that Foxman and the ADL have done more damage to Judeo-Christian relations with their showboating and disruptive criticisms of Mel and this movie than anything the movie itself could have done.

I guess we can hope that Mel will release his "Director's Cut" of the film later and we can see it all as he intended on VHS or DVD sometime in the future.

[unspun]

"Mr. Gibson also responded to a letter from Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who had requested a meeting and asked Mr. Gibson to consider a postscript that would 'implore your viewers to not let the movie turn some toward a passion of hatred.'"

Hatred of Jews, because they condemned a Jew.

"King of the Jews" - Yeshua H'Messiah - who called Himself the "son of man"

[Argus]

He doesn't begin to understand the difference between dying in a famine and people being cremated solely for what they are."

It's Foxman who doesn't get the similarity of millions of victims of deliberate political murder in the Stalinist terror famine, as well as the Gulag, to the Nazis' deliberate political murder of millions in concentration camps.

[rmlew]

I believe the context is important. Gibron was essentially asked to refute his father's denial.
Gibson chose to give a general answer, that is true, but did not satisfy many.

I don't give a wit about the ante-deluvian views of Hutton Gibson. The only issue for me was the report that Gibson drew not only from the Gospels, but also from the anti-Semitic visions of Sister Anne Catherine Emmerich.

[rmlew]

Foxman would love a backlash.

[Nachum]

"I have friends and parents of friends who have numbers on their arms. The guy who taught me Spanish was a Holocaust survivor. He worked in a concentration camp in France. Yes of course. Atrocities happened. War is horrible. The Second World War killed tens of millions of people. Some of them were Jews in concentration camps. Many people lost their lives. In the Ukraine several million starved to death between 1932 and 1933. During the last century 20 million people died in the Soviet Union."

Mel's answer was a politician's spinmiesterly obfuscation. Instead of directly answering the question, he danced around it. The simple and respectful answer would have been a simple "yes, their was a holocost of the Jews". To say that "some of them were Jews" begs the argument, "how many?" This is a public relations nightmare. That is why he is deleting scenes, apologizing, agonizing, and speechifying. It is only going to get worse for him.

To all manner of Christians, he is a new hero. To the Jews, he is now a bigot. To the secular people in America, middle of the road folks, he is now suspect of being an extremist possibly to be shunned. He is big box office and I am sure, from his management, to the studios that bankroll him, they wondering if he is hurting his box office take. Look for more "interviews" and "statements" and "ecumenical meetings". It is already boring.

[Polybius]

To describe Jewish suffering during the Holocaust as `some of them were Jews in concentration camps' is an afterthought that feeds right into the hands of Holocaust deniers and revisionists."

Isn't it also revisionism to ignore all others, besides the Jews, who died in the Nazi blood bath as if only Jews were Nazi victims?

Forty million people died in Europe during World War II because of the Nazis.

The other 34 million deserve a little bit of attention every now and then.......if it's not too Politically Incorrect.

[Ronin]

Of course he would. Anything to keep the pot bubbling. Controversy means publicity and publicity means more air time for him and his fellow yammerheads and more contributions -- which is the name of his game.

[sinkspur]

I don't give a wit about the ante-deluvian views of Hutton Gibson. The only issue for me was the report that Gibson drew not only from the Gospels, but also from the anti-Semitic visions of Sister Anne Catherine Emmerich.

Gibson certainly seems conflicted over the Jewish issue. He is defensive and coy in his responses.

Foxman and Hier will never be satisfied, but repudiating his father in no uncertain terms would go a long way to resolve this.

He did not do that.

[rwfromkansas]

I am rather disappointed in Freepers.....that the deletion of one scene somehow is caving in and giving in to his critics.

Yeah, one scene will be deleted, but big deal. It is not an essential part of the scene though it is Scriptural.

Some folks on here get upset over anything...

It is just one scene we are talking about here, not two, not three, just one minor scene.

[Inyokern]

That's a shame ... the scene is very biblical

No it is not. The way Gibson intended to show it was not true to the Gospel of Matthew. He was having Caiaphas say the words rather than the crowd.

Apparently, being true to the Gospels is secondary. Showing the Jews as villians is the important thing. As long as the Jews are shown as villians, it does not really matter if the scene is an accurate portrayal of the Gospel, eh?

[ElkGroveDan]

Unfortunately this won't appease them.

I learned at a younger age learned not to turn and run from an angry dog, or the animal will be emboldened to attack you. I learned much later in life not to run from bears in the wild for the same reason. Finally I have learned in a career of public policy, when you back down in the face of criticism, your enemies will still pursue you to the death.

I can guarantee that the criticism of Gibson and his fine work will only become MORE shrill.

[rmlew]

Foxman and Hier will never be satisfied, but repudiating his father in no uncertain terms would go a long way to resolve this.
He did not do that.
I agree 100%.
The problem is that many people do not understand this distinction.