Replies

I think I catch your point. But maybe my question wasn't clear. What if some other movie maker wants to depict some other historical figure, male or female, being tortured to death? Seems to me that a movie studio might think about financing such a film. Call me crazy, but I bet a few movie makers will try it. And it seems to me Christians will have a hard time complaining.

What if some other movie maker wants to depict some other historical figure, male or female, being tortured to death?

No person has ever suffered the torture of Jesus.

I understand your concern also, but I say, 'let them make their disgusting movies --- we'll voice our objection with our boycotts.'

I'm sure Hollywood has made some truly violent and disgusting films, but I can't name them, because I don't watch them.

If Hollywood depended on me and folks like me, it would be a ghost town.

I think I catch your point. But maybe my question wasn't clear. What if some other movie maker wants to depict some other historical figure, male or female, being tortured to death? Seems to me that a movie studio might think about financing such a film. Call me crazy, but I bet a few movie makers will try it. And it seems to me Christians will have a hard time complaining.

Great, but that isn't what Christians complain about.

Here is the relevant portion of the article:

But the Christian community's enthusiasm for The Passion has dealt a catastrophic blow to its credibility in condemning violence in films and squalid video games such as Grand Theft Auto. Gibson's movie is one of the most brutal and bloody in the history of film and rivals The Texas Chainsaw Massacre for sheer gore.

No doubt my Christian brethren would argue that the violence in The Passion is warranted, given the fact that the subject matter is religiously inspiring. But I predict that Hollywood directors famous for gratuitous violence, such as Quentin Tarantino and Oliver Stone, will now find convincing arguments that violence in their films also serves an important social purpose.

Note that the author says NOTHING about documentary or biographical films here. He specifically refers to fictional films that contain gratuitous violence.

gratuitous criticism

Obviously, what the the author is referring to in those movies is completely different than the violence in The Passion.

What if some other movie maker wants to depict some other historical figure, male or female, being tortured to death?

Guess you missed Braveheart? Good man, outnumbered, betrayed by (some) of his own people, sentenced to die by a cruel occupying ruler. Then tortured and executed as his own people watch on silently... then followed up with a brief but inspirational ending.

It could be argued that Mel Gibson already did The Passion. Just the names/dates/places were changed.

(ducking out for cover now)

And it seems to me Christians will have a hard time complaining.

True enough. But they can stay home in droves, should they choose to do so. :-)

A couple of points...

1) If this is the "most violent movie in the history of Hollywood", then I'm too stupid to see it. They've tried to hang that label on it, but I don't think it's sticking.

I do think there's a huge difference between "Kill Bill" type gratiutous violence, and an accurate depiction of what maight actually and plausibly happen.

Case in point: "Once Upon a Time in Mexico", a recent box office bomb, used gore and violence in ways that were completely implausible. Nothing that could be perceived as accurate.

The Patriot, Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan and other "fiction flicks" were bloody and violent and did not portray violence in a gratuitous way. All were rated "R", as was TPOTC, mainly for their violence. What's to complain about?

How would the praise of a rated "R" movie, take away Christians credibility when it comes to protesting graphic violence on television? Rated "PG" shows? Etc.? This charge is completely disingenious.