[sinkspur]

And, you'd have to admit...the success of the artist has it all over the Buckley review.

Well, if "success" is the measure, you're right.

I just don't get the unwillingness to tolerate any criticism of this movie on Free Republic.

In fact, given the movie's success, it would seem an overreaction to trash anyone who objects to one thing or another in the movie.

Gibson has a reputation for producing violent, bloody movies, and The Passion apparently doesn't disappoint.

[anniegetyourgun]

Having seen it, I would say it was the best film of the subject yet made. Is it the best movie I've ever seen....no.

One thing I do know is that the success of this film is never going to approach the "Jesus" film - now in over 800 languages and seen by over 6 billion worldwide. (It is direct account, line-by-line of the gospel of Luke.)

[jwalsh07]

It isn't only the interminable scourging, which is done with endless inventories of instruments. The Bible has Christ suffering the weight of the cross as he climbs to Golgotha, but that is not enough for Gibson. He has stray soldiers impeding Christ every step of the way, bringing down their clubs and whips and scourges in something that cannot be understood as less than sadistic frenzy.

Why should this surprise a man who lived in a century when Germans marched Jews into ovens and immolated them? I find his amazement at Romans being cruel and sadistic historically inaccurate and downright wacky.

He never mentions Gibsons dramatic license with srcipture when it comes to Jews displaying inordiante humanity toward Jesus, such as Simon and Veronica.

Why do you suppose that is and would that affect your opinion of the movie?

[hobbes1]

Gibson has a reputation for producing violent, bloody movies, and The Passion apparently doesn't disappoint.

Ever ready with the Ad Hominem.....

Can you honestly say, that The Patriot, a movie about battles that were faught, with Guns, Cannon and Sword, up close, or Braveheart, depicting an age where men faught Battles with Axes and Swords, in close quarters were unrealistically bloody?

Is it not just as, nay, more fair to say that he produces accurate movies of Violent and Bloody times?