NationStates Jolt Archive

So I rented Mel Gibson's little religious vehicle last night.
I figured, "Hey, I hear its gory, why not see some Romans put the Red Ass Beatdown on Jeebus for a while."

Im gonna be fair about this and not let my own personal beliefs get in the way of making an honest report of the movie.
So, in a nutshell, here it is:

I'd heard a lot of hype about this film. Many were calling it "a big budget snuff film" or were going on and on about its "religious impact" or what have you.

What I saw was a decent movie, with Jeebus getting the snot kicked outta him the entire film.
It starts about 2o minutes into the movie, and the Royal Beatdown continues up until he snuffs it.
It almost seemed senseless after two hours of it, and I was almost looking forward to the actual crucifixion just to see something a little different.

Now, you Christians are thinking, "Well...thats the point, to show the suffering of Christ".
Yeah.
I know.
But I'm talking about the movie for the sake of film.

To those who say the violence was too over the top...
I say....any Friday the 13th sequel was far worse.
There were two parts that were a little graphic.
The scourging scene where they brutally whip the Holy Wazzoo out of Big J for what seems like hours.
For those of you who dont know what a scourge is, its a whip with metal barbs that grab flesh, and tear it off like claws.
Pretty brutal, for the average movie goer to see, unless you like Horror films.

The other was the nailing to the cross part.
Sadly, Mel went with the traditional Christian ideal where Jesus was shown to be nailed by the hands.
Sadly, science says "No...the hands arent tough enough to support a mans body weight when pierced like that."
It was actually done through the wrists.

But..

It was pretty graphic.

The thing was....the guy was ALREADY beat to shit, before he even laid eyes on the cross.
They kick and punch him like Rodney King for two hours even before the actual crucifixion.
Not to mention flaying the flesh from his bones.

Was it a good movie?
I liked it, but I have sick sense of humour.
I enjoy watching a good beating.
I dont know hiow I'd feel if I were a christian, seeing a representation of my saviour getting the Holy Business pummeled out of him for two and a half hours a good time.

I also must point out that it certainly didnt change my views of Christianity either.
I have heard that some have found that it re-energized thier faith, but I just dont see why.....thats just me...

So...

I give it a three and a half out of a possible five.
The acting was excellent, and the cinematography was too.

I like the Southpark view of it ... "A two and a half hour snuff film"

However, I will buy the DVD just because I think it's something important for my kids to see when they're older.

I thought it was a silly movie. I believe the life and teachings of Jesus made him a great Buddha and it's important that the story be told and his teachings be revered.

(Disclaimer: This will scare some of the people who regularly read my posts)

I love him. Does that surprise you? It shouldn't. I would love to have met him ... to touch his face and make him smile a little. If he is real, then I am glad; but if he is made up, I have a renewed hope for mankind that we can create something so beatific and wonderful. Is he *the* son of God? No, of course not, I don't believe that. However, when he said "Love thine enemy" I got goosebumps. It's inhuman to say something so wonderful.

Anyway, his brutal torture and death at the hands of the Romans was a pointless thing to put in cinema. Gibson should be flogged.

The other was the nailing to the cross part.
Sadly, Mel went with the traditional Christian ideal where Jesus was shown to be nailed by the hands.
Sadly, science says "No...the hands arent tough enough to support a mans body weight when pierced like that."
It was actually done through the wrists.


Actually, I heard that the current theory is that Christ didn't have long enough arms to be staked through the wrists. They drove the spikes through his hands, and just tied some rope around his wrists to support his body.

Im wondering if God (I know...I know..) didnt aprove of that either...

I heard that the actor who played Jesus was struck by lightning while filming.

Actually, I heard that the current theory is that Christ didn't have long enough arms to be staked through the wrists. They drove the spikes through his hands, and just tied some rope around his wrists to support his body.


Ive heard that too....But it would be less distance to the wrists form the center of the cross, than to the palms.

I'd also like to point out that one thing in the film did make me weep ....

Mary's plight. Seeing Mary's reaction to her son's torture. As a parent, I could never watch my child go through such a thing.

|The movie was just violent. Very well filmed violence, but still nothing but violence. It contains a lot of catholic dogma, ignoring well established evidence regarding Roman justice as well as a ridiculous number of scenes focusing on the face or Jesus' mother.

Then there's the whole comedy Satan, I love it when he throws a tantrum at the end!

I'd give it 3 out of 5, and a "could do better".

I'd also like to say that I can certainly understand why members of the Jewish community were upset by the film.
It most certainly does peg them as the ones who were responsible for his death.
The movie isnt shy about portraying them as damn near evil.

Ive heard that too....But it would be less distance to the wrists form the center of the cross, than to the palms.

True, but that's not what's important. There were pre-made holes/indents where the spikes had to be driven in. Otherwise the spikes would never be able to hold. Christ's palms lined up to the holes - not his wrists.

I'd also like to say that I can certainly understand why members of the Jewish community were upset by the film.
It most certainly does peg them as the ones who were responsible for his death.
The movie isnt shy about portraying them as damn near evil.

Ah yeah ... well ... ummm ... got no reply.

I know the world thinks the Jews killed Jesus, but that's because the Christian world doesn't understand logic.

According to the Bible: Jesus was captured on Passover Eve (Erev Pasach) and taken to a Jewish court the next day, which, by the way, was the Sabbath.

No Jewish court would ever meet on the Sabbath. Period. It wouldn't happen. No matter what the case.

Also, Jesus was to be crucified and rise again 3 days later. Friday to Sunday (good friday to easter sunday) is only 2 days, not 3.

Someone must have left out Easter Monday.

*shrug*

Inconsistencies run amuck.

|The movie was just violent. Very well filmed violence, but still nothing but violence. It contains a lot of catholic dogma, ignoring well established evidence regarding Roman justice as well as a ridiculous number of scenes focusing on the face or Jesus' mother.

Then there's the whole comedy Satan, I love it when he throws a tantrum at the end!

I'd give it 3 out of 5, and a "could do better".

With respect, I think I can clear up one muddled scene involving Roman justice. What exactly are you referring to?

True, but that's not what's important. There were pre-made holes/indents where the spikes had to be driven in. Otherwise the spikes would never be able to hold. Christ's palms lined up to the holes - not his wrists.


I remember the pre-set holes, and see what you mean, but once you pound the hole through the wrist, whats to stop you form pounding them in until theyre snug, or set tight?

You already got that nice big mallet there...

I remember the pre-set holes, and see what you mean, but once you pound the hole through the wrist, whats to stop you form pounding them in until theyre snug, or set tight?

You already got that nice big mallet there...

Imagine assembling a desk or some other wooden furniture. When you have to screw in a really long screw someplace, the wood often has the majority of the hole ready to go. This is done because it's a hell of a lot easier. The cross was a really thick piece of wood. You, as the Roman dude, have two choices. One, you could spend half and hour hammering in two spikes into a writhing human being and through a solid block of wood. This way you'd "do it right" as far as the wrist thing is concerned. Or, you could just hammer the spike into the pre-set location, and just tie the guy off. Choice number two is a lot less work with a lot less time and effort involved. I really do think it's that simple. The Romans just didn't want to pound through a ton of wood.

BackwoodsSquatches; You make it sound like the bible scene in A clockwork orange, where the dear narrator reads the bible, and sees himself whipping the hell out of Jesus while smiling pleasurable :>

Imagine assembling a desk or some other wooden furniture. When you have to screw in a really long screw someplace, the wood often has the majority of the hole ready to go. This is done because it's a hell of a lot easier. The cross was a really thick piece of wood. You, as the Roman dude, have two choices. One, you could spend half and hour hammering in two spikes into a writhing human being and through a solid block of wood. This way you'd "do it right" as far as the wrist thing is concerned. Or, you could just hammer the spike into the pre-set location, and just tie the guy off. Choice number two is a lot less work with a lot less time and effort involved. I really do think it's that simple. The Romans just didn't want to pound through a ton of wood.


That does make sense, although, I myself...

Would have made more than one set of grooves.

One size fits all, so to speak....

BackwoodsSquatches; You make it sound like the bible scene in A clockwork orange, where the dear narrator reads the bible, and sees himself whipping the hell out of Jesus while smiling pleasurable :>


Well...

Ask any Catholic out there....I AM personally responsible for the suffering of Christ.

That does make sense, although, I myself...

Would have made more than one set of grooves.

One size fits all, so to speak....

Yeah, like belt buckles!

Yeah, like belt buckles!


Indeed.

This way, you can re-use the cross in the future.

SIX CROSSES, ONE SIZE FITS ALL.....NO WAITING!

Well...

Ask any Catholic out there....I AM personally responsible for the suffering of Christ.

*shakes fist in some kind of wrathful manner*

I AM personally responsible for the suffering of Christ.

Bastard! I knew it! :D

Indeed.

This way, you can re-use the cross in the future.

SIX CROSSES, ONE SIZE FITS ALL.....NO WAITING!

Now I've got Life of Brian stuck in my head.

HEY I'M BRIAN AND SO'S MY WIFE!

Well...

Ask any Catholic out there....I AM personally responsible for the suffering of Christ.


Oh my god!

He killed Jesus....

You BASTARD!

Ah yeah ... well ... ummm ... got no reply.

I know the world thinks the Jews killed Jesus, but that's because the Christian world doesn't understand logic.

According to the Bible: Jesus was captured on Passover Eve (Erev Pasach) and taken to a Jewish court the next day, which, by the way, was the Sabbath.

No Jewish court would ever meet on the Sabbath. Period. It wouldn't happen. No matter what the case.

Also, Jesus was to be crucified and rise again 3 days later. Friday to Sunday (good friday to easter sunday) is only 2 days, not 3.

Someone must have left out Easter Monday.

*shrug*

Inconsistencies run amuck.

From what i've seen on Discovery's documentary on Jesus (Which is NON religious), he WAS brought to a "court". He claimed to be a Messiah, and that was a threat towards the jewish religious society - he was a rebel, and was maybe even seen as an infidel. There had been more guys like Jesus, doing this unforgiven thing, and they were hanged. End of story. The followers of thoose, simply scattered again. Jesus however had a big gory blood fest of a death, that made him a martyr, and the one to be so kindly descriped in the bible. Jesus was an intelligent person, who started a religious revolution in a religous governed world. (And that's all just mighty fine, but doesn't make me believe anything)

Oh my god!

He killed Jesus....

You BASTARD!

Babylon park:

Oh my G'quon, they killed Kosh!

You bastards!

Imagine assembling a desk or some other wooden furniture. When you have to screw in a really long screw someplace, the wood often has the majority of the hole ready to go. This is done because it's a hell of a lot easier. The cross was a really thick piece of wood. You, as the Roman dude, have two choices. One, you could spend half and hour hammering in two spikes into a writhing human being and through a solid block of wood. This way you'd "do it right" as far as the wrist thing is concerned. Or, you could just hammer the spike into the pre-set location, and just tie the guy off. Choice number two is a lot less work with a lot less time and effort involved. I really do think it's that simple. The Romans just didn't want to pound through a ton of wood.

Agreed. Also, the nails weren't (arguably) the main support. The victim would have been tied to the cross by the wrist or upper arm to hold them in place, and the nails through the wrist helped speed up the execution to about a week, as opposed to about 3 weeks.

Agreed. Also, the nails weren't (arguably) the main support. The victim would have been tied to the cross by the wrist or upper arm to hold them in place, and the nails through the wrist helped speed up the execution to about a week, as opposed to about 3 weeks.

Yup. I would personally take this punishment over some other Roman tortures. Imagine the Romans thrusting a spike into your upper thiegh. Then they let you dangle at the top like a piece of cloth on a flagpole. If the guards spear you correctly, you die when it pierces a lung. And oh yeah, the more you squirm, the faster you die. *shudder*

My understanding was that the victim usually died in about three days, from slow asphyxiation.
The weight of the body was not enough to let the diaphragm contract, and you painfully suffocated over three days, unless you died from blood loss, or exsposure.

My understanding was that the victim usually died in about three days, from slow asphyxiation.
The weight of the body was not enough to let the diaphragm contract, and you painfully suffocated over three days, unless you died from blood loss, or exsposure.

Eh. My info's second-hand. You're probably correct. I'd like to think my point's still valid...

Im wondering if God (I know...I know..) didnt aprove of that either...

I heard that the actor who played Jesus was struck by lightning while filming.Twice, from what I heard. Not direct hits though.

I found their outlandish claim that Jesus invented the table too hard to believe. The movie fails.



Actually, I pretty much agree with your review, although I think if you're going to make a movie about jesus, it should be about the good he supposidly did not about him getting beat to shit. The extent of the beating became unbelievable before long, which kinda ruined the movie a bit. He would have died about 4 times of bloodloss and probably concussion.

My understanding was that the victim usually died in about three days, from slow asphyxiation.
The weight of the body was not enough to let the diaphragm contract, and you painfully suffocated over three days, unless you died from blood loss, or exsposure.

This is why I think the nails would have gone through the palms, not the wrists. They're gratuitous, really: all you need to do is to tie someone to a cross and leave them long enough. If you shove big nails through someone's wrists, though, there's a good chance that they'll bleed to death in a few minutes, which kind of spoils things from a Roman point of view.

EDIT: regarding the film, I'd like to see the bloopers reel. Any chance of some comedy out-takes making it to the DVD, do you think?