Flipside Movie Emporium

[Danny Baldwin]

The first step to quitting is admitting you have a problem.
_________________
Danny Baldwin

View My Reviews

[the night watchman]

[beltmann]

[Michael Scrutchin]

This just in: Ebert calls Passion a "very great film":

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/040221/lasa002_1.html

Funny how people latch onto silly rumors that have no basis in anything.

Roeper digs it, too.
_________________
Michael Scrutchin
Flipside Movie Emporium
www.flipsidearchive.com

[the night watchman]

That actually makes a tad more sense. Considering Ebert's a scholar of Catholicism, I found the idea of his rejection of this movie wholesale completely inscrutable. Actually, I am little disappointed too; I was curious to find out how a movie could go so wrong in his eyes, since Gibson isn?t exactly a slouch when it comes to filmmaking.
_________________
"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

-David Cronenberg

[Danny Baldwin]

That was, of course, the exact fear I had hen getting into the discussion. Damn WABC. Or, maybe, it was true, but he changed it, because of controversy, such as this.
_________________
Danny Baldwin

View My Reviews

[the night watchman]

[The Third M?n]

[The Third M?n]

This just in:

Newsweek does not like Gibson's film.

It's a very peculiar review. Take your time and read it, but I don't know whether or not the reviewer's excuses for not liking the film can be justified.

[beltmann]

I was reading some other boards and it seems that perhaps we should be less worried about The Passion inspiring anti-Semitism than about it fueling hatred for Christians. Funny how that works.

Eric

[beltmann]

[beltmann]

Relevant quote from Richard Corliss' positive review in Time:

"Is the film anti-Jewish? Well, which Jews? Start with the Sanhedrin, the rabbinical senate that found Jesus guilty of violating temple law and handed him to the Roman authority for summary punishment. The rabbis had their reasons; they saw the upstart as dangerous, blasphemous, possibly insane for proclaiming himself the Messiah and telling his followers they would live forever if they ate his flesh and drank his blood. The film sees the rabbis as doctrinally pure but politically corrupt. Indeed, it suggests they are a rogue cell calling a midnight caucus for a frame-up. But Gibson also shows many Jews (and no Romans) treating Jesus with a kindness and charity one might call Christian. We acknowledge, then, that The Passion is rabidly anti-Sanhedrin ? opposed, as Jesus and other Jews were, to the Establishment of the time. But to charge the film with being anti-Semitic is like saying those who oppose the Bush Administration's Iraq policy are anti-American."

Although I haven't yet seen the movie for myself, I think I buy Corliss' logic regarding this point.

Eric

[beltmann]

I think L.A. Weekly's Scott Foundas is one of the best critics working, and I've been eagerly anticipating his take on The Passion. Here are two excerpts:

1. "...the film in question is called The Passion of the Christ and that its protagonist is no ordinary human being, but Jesus of Nazareth. Try forgetting this, though, just for a moment ? indeed, it may be necessary to do so in order to clear one?s mind of the incessant media fracas that has swirled around this production ever since it was announced... Gibson has made a big, bold, nightmarishly beautiful film not just about the dawn of the Christian faith, but about the awful tendency of human communities (wherever and whenever in the world they may exist) toward self-preservation, intolerance and mob rule. The Passion of the Christ will certainly have special resonance for Christians, but even those indifferent or hostile to the film on historical and/or theological grounds may find themselves moved by its potent depiction of physical, psychological and religious oppression.

2. I would, however, like to say a few words about Mel Gibson, who is one of the biggest movie stars in the world, the subject of many women?s fantasies, and who has had to pay a price for not conforming to certain people?s notions about how such an icon should behave. (How many other filmmakers have ever been held accountable for the beliefs of their elderly fathers?) On the cover of Entertainment Weekly, a headline questioned: ?Can Mel Gibson Survive The Passion of the Christ?? And make no mistake, Gibson has done the unthinkable ? not by directing and financing a movie about Jesus, mind you, but by speaking openly about the emptiness of wealth and fame, by daring to question the integrity of The New York Times and (most sinful of all) by reminding Hollywood that there are conservatives in its midst more conservative than Governor Ah-nuld. In short, Mel Gibson scares certain people, and such behavior doesn?t earn you many friends in this town. But Gibson exudes a confidence that says he doesn?t need them anyway, thank you very much. Which, of course, only scares them all the more."

I still haven't seen the picture for myself, so I can't say whether his take is accurate--and his suggestion that certain protests have been fueled by the same self-preservation instincts explored in the first excerpt may be unjustified--but I do appreciate how Foundas strives to view the film within contexts separate from the issues of anti-Semitism and gore.

Eric

[the night watchman]

Just read Rob's review. Bravo; very nicely done. It seems as though the "controversy" is starting to fade since the film's release, and many of the reviews I've read, both positive and negative, have aroused my interest again. I might end up seeing in the theater after all.
_________________
"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

-David Cronenberg

[Al_Bundy_007]

long story short- ***/****