.....
c.. The statement by the Jews, "Let His blood be upon us and upon our children."
The statement is still in the film. Gibson chose not to have it in the subscript.
Concerning the INRI. Mel went to so much trouble to be accurate, but he didn't have it in Greek as well as Latin and Hebrew per Pilate's order.
Also, Mel had a BIG no-no when he showed the soldiers tear Christ's tunic in two before crucifying Him. Scripture - both the Gospel account and the Psalms it quotes - is VERY clear (for theological reasons) that the tunic, woven of one piece, remained intact. b.. The greatest inaccuracy is the flashback to Our Lord's life in Nazareth, where He is portrayed as a young man who (a) does not answer His mother when she calls; (b) is working on a table which is made improperly; (c) playfully splashes water in Our Lady's face as He is washing His hands. It is impossible that any of these things be true. The scene detracts from the film, and should be removed altogether.
I don't know why the author feels it is "inaccurate". Clearly imagination on the part of Mel. Non-scriptural but not necessarily anti-scriptural. If anything else, it allowed Mel to show Christ in His "hidden life" as a carpenter and the special relationship He had with his mother. Also, His humanity comes through in this scene from daily life. It introduced Mary in the movie visually, which seems to follow the events mostly through her eyes (sorrowful mysteries of the Rosary). I thought the scene worked well. It got people in the theatre to laugh. If ever a man laughed, Christ must have. From there on out, no laughing occurred.
The table is made to the specifications of "a rich man". I interpret Jesus's willingness to do such a thing as another dimension of his humility. Clearly the table prefigures the table in the Upper Room, as well as the Altar -- both of which antiquity would have considered too high for proper dining.
The splashing of Mary with water is a clear reference to the Asperges. I'm stunned that a Lefebvreite follower should not get this.
The statement is still in the film. Gibson chose not to have it in the subscript.
Regarding this, I am not that sure, it could be, but it seems that a lot was edited out of the scene with Pilate. It was rather choppy with an editing, that seemed purposely unprofessional as if to say: "I had to cut something here guys ;-( "
I am thinking of the scene BEFORE the table flashback to Nazareth, when Our Lord glances at a carpenter with a chisel in Caiphas' courtyard - the carpenter who was already making His Cross before the hearing of His guilt or innocnece was finished. I think this was some material from the stigmatic, the Veneraable Ann Katherine Emmerich, that was deleted, only Mel wanted to keep the Nazareth scene so he had the briefest galnce and then a very choppy edit.
The music during the scenes with Pilate were also very choppy or fading in our out - did anyone else notice this or did I just catch a bad print?
As far as the author's views, they are the author's not my own. I thought the squatting at the table bit was a little silly but the wholse scene was appropriate - and YES, GOD DOES LAUGH - WELL HE CERTAINLY HAS A SENSE OF HUMOR!
Concerning the INRI. Mel went to so much trouble to be accurate, but he didn't have it in Greek as well as Latin and Hebrew per Pilate's order.
Yes, I caught this also. It would have been nice to also hear Pilate tell the Pharisees:
JOHN 19:22 Pilate answered: What I have written, I have written.
I had my own little list also, I guess we all had!