The Passion

Thanks for sharing that with us, Kinney.

Critics are rather harsh on the film over here so I was seriously considering on passing up on this one. I will now reconsider as I like thought provoking movies very much.

What you saw in the movie was not real, it was the vision of Mel Gibson of what he believes actually happened. Does not make it less worthwhile though.

Secularism is not the problem here "Political correctness" can indeed be a pain in the ass So the use of violence in order to bring across a certain POV in itself cannot be an issue. Debating whether something is too much or over the top is not very interesting if the movie is indeed as thought provoking as you say it is. I prefer a thought provoking violent movie over a political correct boring one every time. I assume it is rated correctly though? (so we know it should be avoided by kids, adequate parental guidance, and stuf?)

Most of the movies he played in were not that thought provocative but I used to watch many of those as well. I haven't seen much if any of his director's work yet. Never seen the Patriot. Did he direct Braveheart?






BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>

///Did he direct Braveheart?


Yes he did, one of my favorite movies by the way!





<A HREF="http://forums.btvillarin.com/index.php?act=ST&f=41&t=2541" target="_new">My Rig</A>

Tolerant of those linguini spined far left liberal scum sucking bottom dwellers?


I'm not religious. I was thinking about seeing the movie, but probably won't. I don't really think Jesus existed the way Christians think he did. He very may have lived, but honestly I don't think there was any man who was the son of god that died for anyone's sins.

I really can't believe anyone would say this. Do you think about what you are going to say before you actually say it? Because if you did, you would know that is totally false. Who are the big goups against violent entertainment and nudity? The Christian right is, not liberals. Who were the main groups that were getting in such a piss fit over the Janet Jackson incident? The Christian right... I think it is a lot "worse" to be so upset about a nipple than it is to be about violence...

Your utter hatred towards liberals really is astounding. Do you manage to find ways to hate them in every aspect of your life? Jeez, lighten up...

-------------------------------------------
<font color=blue> "Trying is the first step towards failure." </font color=blue>

Ok why won't you go to a theater
1.=To tight to spend extra bucks . ( i am in there )
2.= Don't have beer
3.=Don't put enough salt on pop corn ( anyone who puts salt on ice cream has to love saltttttt. ha ha .
4.=not comfortable ( can't spread out like a beach whale )

The man of steel said that

sucks to be you.

for $10 you can get a VIP room at the theatre. They have beer, large leather couch's, and pretty much any treat you want. Of course you have to pay for your beer, but still it's a hell of a seat.

Je bent de meest onverschillige hasj dealende hoer die ik ooit heb ontmoet.
<b><font color=green>hagedis</font color=green></b>,<b><font color=green>hagedis</font color=green></b>
Svol heeft een reusachtige worst

Don't have them new fangeled things where i live . Thinking about puttin up one of them there drive in theater things next year . I will have to buy one of them cars then i guess.------------------WoW a whole theater for 10$ american .

The man of steel said that

[absolutely unneeded off-topic comment]I'll praise you for your gloriously nice ass from behind you. [/absolutely unneeded off-topic comment]

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over <font color=red>62</font color=red> no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A>

Nor am I strictly a conservative. But certain judgement calls about situations lead to to discover much about a persons intelligence and thought process (whether it is conservative or liberal leaning).
Letting people live is certainly a great degree of tolerance
As if killing people would only be "minor" intolerance.. LOL.

You need to be reading more reviews and listening to more critics then if you havent seen the blatant bias against Mel Gibson.
They had prejudged this movie from a preproduction script to being anti-semitic. Funny thing is, you can nearly taste the hatred for Mel in many reviews by typical liberal Hollywood know-nothings.
Andy Rooney called Gibson a wacko.
WTF?? Is that necessary? Does it have any basis in fact at all?
I dont know what else you need for proof.
Liberals are the hatemongers, not your "Christian Right".

Thats not true. And IMO, a truly twisted take on people who spread a message of loving your neighbor, turning the other cheek.. ect.
They merely want a healthy society, the same society led by Christian ideals that has gotten us here. I personally find peace within me living by those philosophys.
I completely disagree with you here. But-

I agree. I want my original post to stand as it stands for what it says.
I feel I explained and knocked down every common criticism of this film in an intelligent and analytical way... basically, an openminded, fair and unbiased view from a non-Christian/non-Jew/non-Muslim. Coming straight from my fingers after having seen the film.
Though, it does make me rethink my faith.. as I'm essentially a Christian without believing Jesus is the son of God... ironic aye? Tho I do believe in a higher power, or creator.
I'm going to have to do much deep meditation on the subject as I'm simply too intrigued.
I will probably seek out a pastor or priest for converation as I want to learn more about Jesus and his sacrifice. He very well could be our messenger from the Creator.

Truly, a beautiful film of love even without Jesus being the main character... and a beautiful message regardless of barrier.

----
RESIDENT FORUM WARRIOR
Support the terrorists, vote democrat
NV/AMD/IBM axis of evil team leader
Who cares about HL2/D3 when we have Call of Duty today!!

Mike you are not unintelligent at all as I've seen you claim.

You have a very deep mind that is very obviously capable of a lot of critical thinking.
I would encourage you to keep learning.

That has to be the most intelligent reply I've gotten.

As you lead on to, amazing to think of such love and sacrifice for others in a time of horrible hatred, cruelty and selfishness.

PS- Thank you about the sig. It does look rather nice on me.

----
RESIDENT FORUM WARRIOR
Support the terrorists, vote democrat
NV/AMD/IBM axis of evil team leader
Who cares about HL2/D3 when we have Call of Duty today!!

Hey, could you get rid of those pretags? They screw up the page formating so you need to scroll sideways to read the posts...

-------------------------------------------
<font color=blue> "Trying is the first step towards failure." </font color=blue>

He never claimed he was unintelligent , he stated he was not very educated. There's quite a difference between the two.



BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>

Well now I claim you're unintelligent, for no other reason than you suck!

Take that bootch!

--
<A HREF="http://www.lochel.com/THGC/album.html" target="_new"><font color=blue><b>This just in, over <font color=red>62</font color=red> no-lifers have their pics up on THGC's Photo Album! </b></font color=blue></A>

Wow, you really didn't understand a word he said did you?

Break it down into sections. He's saying that LIBERALS are NOT afraid of violence UNTIL it portrays something they don't want to see. In other words, they WANT to see violent crimes in action movies, but they're AFRAID of the message that level of violence portrays when a RELIGIOUS film is involved.

OK, let me put it to you this way: The left RARELY complains about violence in movies, UNTIL NOW. The right OFTEN complained about violence in other movies, but NOT THIS ONE. You see the reversal? Probably not, I'll leave you alone to figure it out.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

...or maybe they just want to STOP people from STABBING BABIES IN THE HEAD durring the birthing process? You obviously don't see the EXTREMES here. The Liberals would downplay such infantacide as a late term abortion, a woman taking control of her body, whatever.

And BTW, I'm a moderate. I often get accused of being a liberal by the religious right...but it's SO MUCH easier to ARGUE with the flakey left.

<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>

Wow Crash! You actually impressed me! I really didn't know (Didn't really pay much attention either, before now... ) of any of your beliefs/philosophies/faiths/etc... until now.

Interesting...



<font color=blue> Did you know that 89.72% of all quoted statistics are false? </font color=blue>

So you'd rather see 100 innocents die than 1.. great logic.

Je bent de meest onverschillige hasj dealende hoer die ik ooit heb ontmoet.
<b><font color=green>hagedis</font color=green></b>,<b><font color=green>hagedis</font color=green></b>
Svol heeft een reusachtige worst

So by that thinking if the one guy on trial used to be an advocate for the death penalty, then by all rights he should go ahead and die. I mean he was already an accesory to all those other murders, so he's not really innocent then is he?

Je bent de meest onverschillige hasj dealende hoer die ik ooit heb ontmoet.
<b><font color=green>hagedis</font color=green></b>,<b><font color=green>hagedis</font color=green></b>
Svol heeft een reusachtige worst

I guess I won't get it. Let me try one more time.

For every 5 guilty people that are executed 100 innocent people should be killed as well. Because the innocent people add to the worlds population and since the world is over populated, it's causing more innocent people to die. But they're not really innocent, because by them being alive they're taking resources away from each other, so they're really killing each other. Ok I think i have it now.

Je bent de meest onverschillige hasj dealende hoer die ik ooit heb ontmoet.
<b><font color=green>hagedis</font color=green></b>,<b><font color=green>hagedis</font color=green></b>
Svol heeft een reusachtige worst

mmmm a moderate extremist. uh.. like being an extremist but not quite? or being extremely moderate?

extremely moderately confusing it is to me, or is it moderately extremely confusing.....my head hurts (extremely i might add). I need some (moderate) sleep.




BigMac

<A HREF="http://www.p3int.com/product_center_NWO_The_Story.asp" target="_new">New World Order</A>

I don't buy that. First of all, liberals aren't being extremely against this movie. Second, from what I hear the violence in this movie is extreme and realistic, moreso than any movie in the past, so even if they are saying things about the violence it can not be compared to a much more tame action movie. Third, the only reason why most conservatives are not complaining about this movie is because it's about Jesus. If it was another movie about some other religious figure that wasn't their own, they would most likely speak out against it like they do your average violent movie.

I corrupt society? Nice job pulling something out of your ass. About a tit, I just have no idea why a tit is considered obscene. It's just a tit. We can show men's tits on TV, but for some reason a woman's breast is obscene? The last time I checked, 50% of the population has breasts, and the other 50% are trying to touch them, so why should they be considered obscene? I personally find titties to be pretty attractive and nice. Of course this doesn't mean nudity should be all over the place, but when it "accidently" happens I don't feel it is worthy of the huge outcry that we saw after the Superbowl.

The thing you fail to see in my point was to question fundamentally what we see as obscene. The Janet Jackson titty caused huge outcry. Let me relate a story to you. A few years ago all the TV stations in Southern California were airing a car chase, which ended with the man stopping on a freeway overpass and he laid out a banner on the ground that said "HMOs are in it for the money." A standoff with the cops ensued. Then, the man lit a bomb off in his car, and caught himself on fire as well as his dog. His dog burned to death, but the man got outside of his car, ran across the street, and put a shotgun in his mouth. Some news choppers zoomed in to watch the man pull the trigger and blow his brains all over the freeway.

Now, that news story, about depicting such violence, was discussed in the media for maybe a day, then just faded away. A nipple was discussed in outrage for weeks. Don't you see the problem here? I personally think that if we showed more nudity on TV and less violence, it would be better for all watching it.

I haven't seen any 8 year olds on trial yet for tearing a girls shirt off... But, I have seen kids less than 10 shoot and kill other kids. I think that's a worse problem than a kid trying to look at a titty.

I don't agree with abortion at all, except for rape or incest, as in those cases the woman didn't willfully act in a way that could result in her becoming pregnant. I think any woman who has "casual" abortions as a pretty lousy person. But, I am just not sure if making it illegal is a wise decision, as that may cause more problems than having it legal. I do not buy the liberal argument of it being just a woman's right to choose, because I do think a baby is involved. I also don't buy it because if a woman should have the right to choose to kill her unborn baby, she should also have the right to pollute her body with drugs (which I actually do agree with), which obviously isn't the case right now.

-------------------------------------------
<font color=blue> "Trying is the first step towards failure." </font color=blue>

But liberals didn't complain about Saving Private Ryan either, no one did really. Also, if there was a movie that glorified *insert non-christian hero here* or was critical of Christianity and used extreme violence to show it, I'm sure that the Christian Right would have something to say about it. Like if a movie was made about the Spanish Inquisition that showed Christians torturing non-Christians, do you really think the right would sit by and say "it's okay because it's art?" HARDLY.

No, most people who had a problem with it had a problem with it because it showed her tit. If her top was ripped off to only show a bikini underneath, would there have been all these people getting upset? No. They saw a nipple (that was 99% covered) and cried foul, because I guess they feel the human body is something to be ashamed of. It's ludicrous.

Well, what I saw there was no warning, as it was a "Special Report" break in of normal programming, in the early afternoon when children would be watching TV.

But that is besides the point. Tits should not be considered obscene! It is ludicrous what censorship does. It's like this... If you watch any of the medical shows on Discovery Channel about plastic or reconstructive surgery, sometimes they deal with boobs. Now, censors will blur out JUST THE NIPPLE, but sometimes while the nipple is being cut up and sewn back on, they'll show it! Or, they'll blur out nipples on corpses, somehow insinuating that people will get horny off of a dead chick. WHAT THE FLYING F UCK is wrong with these people? It is ludicrous that they go to those extremes to blur a tit, or "naughty words" for that matter, but have no problem with terrible violence.

It makes no sense to me...

I have not seen any news articles of 8 year olds harassing eachother because of the Janet Jackson, or any other, incident. Please enlighten me if possible.

-------------------------------------------
<font color=blue> "Trying is the first step towards failure." </font color=blue>

Yes, and the liberals are complaining more about the supposed anti-semitism in the movie than they are the violence...

-------------------------------------------
<font color=blue> "Trying is the first step towards failure." </font color=blue>

I'm so anti-religion that I refuse to see this movie. Jesus is probably pissed off beyond belief that his name and message are being used in vain that when all you religious people are at the shiny gates of heaven you'll find a sign that reads:

"No shoes, no shirt, no christians/catholics, no service"

<font color=red>_________________________________________</font color=red>
<b><A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">I am watching you!</A></b>

Face it. If Jesus was the son of god he sure as hell, pardon the pun, didn't want you fools acting the way you do and using his name in vain.

If I were Jesus all you religious people, supposedly praying for me, would make me sick.

His sacrafice was for nothing.

<font color=red>_________________________________________</font color=red>
<b><A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">I am watching you!</A></b>

Jesus?!?!?

Jesus was like that guy who stands out on the street corner and preaches. He was this guy dressed in rags who preached. Just like homeless looking nut job doesn't do anything for me, neither has Jesus.

Jesus?????!!!!!

He's this character in a book.

Jesus?!?!?!?!!?!?!

Homeboy died for nothing. If anything his death led to the deaths of many others.

JESUS!?!?!?!?!

If he really was the son of god he sure did a crappy job of making people be better. His name is used to spread ignorance and stupidity.

<font color=red>_________________________________________</font color=red>
<b><A HREF="http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?dhlucke" target="_new">I am watching you!</A></b>