Replies

Before you retort, please note that the "History Channel" is completely different from "The Learning Channel"! I was taught that before one can debate effectively, one must know the subject matter correctly and factually. Plus, you missed my point completely! Your opinion of the film is your right to hold as you see fit, and I would defend that right to the Nth degree. I just wanted to make clear the actual historical data on the Roman Army in its treatment of insurrection, cowardice in battle and revolution, perceived or factual. The treatment was brutal whatever the case and Mr. Gibson was right on "historically" in the inhuman way Jesus Christ was made to suffer prior to his death! End of story! If you cannot handle the truth or are repulsed by it, than why see the movie at all.

"I just wanted to make clear the actual historical data on the Roman Army in its treatment of insurrection, cowardice in battle and revolution, perceived or factual."

The actual historical data also implies that Pilate's personal role in the brutality of his province was almost maniacal; instead we have the introvert plagued his by concience who waxes about the meaning of truth.

But that's all very much beside the point. Historical accuracy is not a kosher road to go down. Admittedly so. Gibson knew that the Romans didn't speak Latin over there. He knew where Jesus was most likely nailed. This is his interprtation, and direction, of the Catholic Gospel story. And that's a completely legitimate story to tell...factual or not. But it's still a story. It still needs to *suspend our disbelief*, and that's where movie-making skill comes in. It's a lazy cop-out to tell the audience "just because". There was plenty of room for a skilled director to maneuver around the things I'm criticizing. People can do random violent things because they're simply psychopaths, but it helps to illustrate first that they, in fact, are (or whatever the case may be). Having some guy come out of the proverbial woodwork and gleefully brutalize someone with an unexplained zeal is simply lazy.

The common theme running through the fans of this, is that the frankness of the scourging scene is what's supposed to carry this movie. That the reproduction weapon was accurate...that he was tied-up correctly...etc. Nice touches, but that amounts to getting concerned with the details and losing track of the big picture.

Did you not notice the clichés and obvious Gibonsims?