[contessa machiaveli]

no one can deny the crucifiction was horribly violent, i think the point scrader was making is that stylistically it was on a par with slasher movies. the blood and gore are over the top, each filmaker has a vision of how to portray the characters and times. does one show heads being lopped off? blood spurting? mutilations? i won't see films like that and i never allowed my daughter to see violence.

is the crucifiction historically accurate? i read somewhere that when people were crucified they were nude to add to the humiliation and that original religious art portrayed that and only in later years (due to the clergy) was it become more modest. so in a sense gibson did exercise some restraint.

[VRWC_minion]

i think the point scrader was making is that stylistically it was on a par with slasher movies.

You must of seen a different movie than I. The blood was no worse than what I see on TV watching police shows.

[7thson]

I saw the film a few weeks back and have come to a rather different conclusion. I believe that the majority of people who have seen The Passion have confused violent with brutal. To me, this movie was not violent but brutal, and it made me wince because - one - I now realize the brutal beating that Jesus endured and - two - I know that mankind brutal inhumanity to his fellow man is well documented throughout history, including the Old Testament.