To: gobucks
There does seem to be a stark contrast in reactions to the film. Those who see Jesus as God suffering for His creation, see all the ironies throughout the film, and those who see Jesus only as a man, see it as a cruel film, God being cruel to humans, and that seems wrong. It is a rich, moving film when you see Jesus as divine.
5 posted on
03/04/2004 7:19:46 PM PST by
jwalburg
(We CAN Question their Patriotism!)
To: jwalburg
Very good. You put into a very few words what many have failed miserably to explain using thousands of words.
8 posted on
03/04/2004 7:24:49 PM PST by
jwalsh07
To: jwalburg
And it paints Jesus as divine, so why do the secular viewers miss the plot of the film even if they don't personally agree with real life Christian doctrine. If they think it's fiction why don't they at least follow how the character is developed?
There is a resurrection - he's whole again. What kind of mere mortal character would ever be portrayed doing that? They sound like they have flunked Classic Literature Appreciation 101.
To: jwalburg
And the sorting has begun.?
To: jwalburg
There does seem to be a stark contrast in reactions to the film. Those who see Jesus as God suffering for His creation, see all the ironies throughout the film, and those who see Jesus only as a man, see it as a cruel film, God being cruel to humans, and that seems wrong. Yes, but remember, this is offered very openly as a religious work based on the Christian gospels. Anyone approaching it in an attempt to see Jesus as "just a man" is playing dishonest games. You don't see many reviews of Handel's Messiah mocking the notion that they're singing about God being born as man. But that's exactly the sort of review we're seeing repeatedly here. "Oh, I don't accept the Gospels, so I'm going to pretend that guy up there is just a man, and ignore the rest of the context." Huh?
At the very best, that is piss-poor reviewing of any work of art. It reduces all those Renaissance paintings of the crucifixion into... how does the Rabbi so kindly phrase it?... "violence in the misplaced service of veneration and love." Perhaps more accurately, it is using the art to attack the artist's religion.
To: jwalburg
I don't think you can attribute differences in perception to any one thing.
A film-buff friend - secular and not Jewish - surprised me. He loved it, but not for religious or political reasons.
He thought it was an example of great film-making, story telling at its best.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson