Posted on 03/09/2004 6:00:17 AM PST by KriegerGeist
Yes, there is. Personally, I thought it was a bit much, but I certainly didn't let it take away from the story. Mel is a Catholic. I would expect to see a more Catholic interpretation than if he were, say, a Baptist or a Pentecostal. The nuances that would be different in the telling don't change the historical facts surrounding the trial and crucificxion of Jesus nor do they change the message of the cross. There has to be some dramatic license with details since scripture doesn't address many details, but the details are dressing. The substance is biblically and historically accurate.
I hadn't considered that.
That had to do with Jewish custom at the time, if I recall correctly. After Joseph died, it fell to Jesus as Mary's firstborn, to see that she was cared for. Because He knew Hw would not be there to care for her, He conferred that responsibility to those He most trusted. That was His message from the cross to John and Mary when He said, "woman, behold thy son; son behold thy mother." I think the movie just took that message a step furthur in having other of the disciples refer to her as mother. It isn't in scripture, but it isn't contrary to scripture either.
I did too. It showed Jesus as being so ordinary, yet so full of life.
I kept expecting that too, although there was a tremendous amount of material conveyed by facial expression in the film and this was one such case. Simon of Cyrene was another.
Actually, all four gospel accounts have the cock crowing immediately upon Peter's third denial. In Luke's account, the cock begins to crow while Peter is still speaking. As far as the movie is concerned, it makes sense that the cock crowing might be drowned out by the noise, but the implication is there nonetheless.
Did I miss something?
I didn't make it clear I was talking about the next movie I would like to see Mel Gibson make?
I realize you didn't address the question to me, but allow me to respond anyway.
When I was a little girl, I loved the rich, colorful illustrations in the Bible, as well as in my Bible story books. They made the scriptures more real to me and, in some ways, more understandable. This movie is nothing more than an animated illustration of the scriptures. It is rooted in, and built on, biblical truth. Biblical art is a rich tradition in the history of the church, but art is always colored by the perception of the artist. The real art is in presenting it in such a way that it can be embraced in perception of the viewer. Mel has taken the truth of the scriptures and given them shape and color and sound, and done so very effectively. Sure, there are elements that are his perception, but how hard is it, when one encounters a perception that is different than one's own, to say, that is simply the perception of the artist? I would think that would only be difficult for one who was afraid his own faith might be changed as a result of seeing the film, and in my opinion, one who held that fear likely has a pretty shaky faith to begin with.
Maybe this movie isn't for everybody. I have no problem with people deciding not to see a movie for whatever reasons, but the fact that there are a lot of people posting on these threads shows that for whatever else people are about this movie, they are not indifferent. I avoided most of these threads until I had seen the movie for two reaons. One, I didn't want my own perception of the movie to be distorted by what others had said about it, and two; if I were going to offer an opinion about the movie itself, I wanted it to be based on my own experience from having seen it. I think it is fine to question something one hasn't seen, but not to judge it based on what others have said. I'm not saying that is what you are doing specifically, just that I see a lot of such comments in general that others make who haven't seen the movie, and I rank their remarks on the same level as those of individuals who don't vote and then complain about the results of an election.
Yes, you did. I guess I should have used a sarcasm tag. I thought it was obvious. I guess not. My apologies for the misunderstanding.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.