To: anniegetyourgun; per loin
Methinks there is a reason why the Buckster retired....and he should keep on doing so. Why? Because he thinks the movie is a bit gratuitously violent? I haven't seen it yet, but there is enough critical mass out there to make that argument.
So what? That doesn't mean that Buckley is senile; it just means that he thinks Gibson was a bit loose with some of the account(much of which was based on the recounting of "visions" of a mystic, Catherine Emmerich). It appears that he was.
I'm forming the opinion that Gibson knew he had to make the movie violent in order to differentiate it from all the saccharin stuff that has gone before.
One should not automatically skewer someone who disagrees with the level of violence, since we cannot know just how violently Jesus was scourged.
19 posted on
03/09/2004 5:19:58 PM PST by
sinkspur
(Adopt a dog or a cat from an animal shelter! It will save one life, and may save two.)
To: sinkspur
Some folks go to the trouble of seeing a movie prior to opining on it.
24 posted on
03/09/2004 5:25:48 PM PST by
per loin
(Ultra Secret News: ADL to pay $12M for defaming Colorado couple.)
To: sinkspur
I'm forming the opinion that Gibson knew he had to make the movie violent in order to differentiate it from all the saccharin stuff that has gone before.I would suggest seeing the movie before forming opinion.
And thats what it was , a movie, based on scripture but an artistic endeavor. And the most powerful one I have ever seen.
There is a disconnect in ths country between the elite and the rest of us and Mr Buckley is one of the elite.
25 posted on
03/09/2004 5:27:21 PM PST by
jwalsh07
(We're bringing it on John but you can't handle the truth!)
To: sinkspur
some evidence of the violence of the scourging by Pilate's surprise that Christ was already dead when Joseph of Arimethea approached him to ask for the body: thus allowing for the fulfillment of O.T. scripture that not a bone would be broken, as happened to the others crucified that day to hasten their deaths before the beginning of the Sabbath.
28 posted on
03/09/2004 5:30:36 PM PST by
gusopol3
To: sinkspur

That doesn't mean that Buckley is senile; it just means that he thinks Gibson was a bit loose with some of the account(much of which was based on the recounting of "visions" of a mystic, Catherine Emmerich). It appears that he was.
Have you read Emmerich? I haven't, but I found a link to all of her "Dolorous Passion" here. I'm a few pages into the scene at Gethsemane. To early to form an opinion on how much Mel borrowed from her that wasn't in the Gospels or related Scriptures.
|
31 posted on
03/09/2004 5:35:49 PM PST by
Sabertooth
(Malcontent for Bush - 2004!)
To: sinkspur
Thank heavens you weighed in with your measured comments, sinkspur. In the Gospels, it's clear that Jesus survived only about eight hours on the cross, when the usual was about three days. That argues for extra suffering pre-crucifixion for Jesus, mortal suffering. Forget which Gospel now, but it was written that near dawn the soldiers came out to break the condemned mens' legs, which would force suffocation on them. Jesus was already dead.
To: sinkspur
While I would agree that we don't know for sure the extent of the actual violence, I think Buckley is pretty harsh on the artist. And, you'd have to admit...the success of the artist has it all over the Buckley review.
To: sinkspur
I haven't seen it yet In that case, why not wait until you have before forming any starting point?
44 posted on
03/10/2004 6:10:30 AM PST by
presidio9
(FREE MARTHA)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson