Impact the Movie: FYI

[scotter]

http://www.impactthemovie.com/

 

In case Christian members mention about it, then forum members know what it is about.

 

-----

 

A curious question: any Ex-Christian members saw the Passion of the Christ movie as an ex-Christian ?

 

Christians see the movie for the spiritual experience, if an Ex-Christian member happened to have seen it, you saw it as a movie like a regular movie shown in the cinema, perhaps? For analysis or other reasons?

 

Thanks.

[Fweethawt]

Look, when good people view someone getting the shit beat out of them and crucified, then someone turns around and tells them that the man willingly got the shit beat out of him and crucified because good people are really bad people, it tends to create a bit of an emotional mind-fuck that causes people to do some whacky shit.

 

This of course, is only a minor part of the "impact".

It's close to the core of the religion, but it's a minor part.

[Mr. Neil]

Never seen it. I have no interest in watching snuff films.

[sonofspong]

I did watch the movie in the theaters, as an exchristian. My reaction was that it BORING AS FUCK. And pretty damn gory, too. Usually, I love violent flicks, im a sucker for blood, guts, and limbs flying about.

 

But not the Passion. It was dull, boring, pointless to me.

 

Now Sin City was great. And not just because Jessica Alba was dancing around half naked.

[Vigile]

http://www.impactthemovie.com/

 

In case Christian members mention about it, then forum members know what it is about.

 

-----

 

A curious question: any Ex-Christian members saw the Passion of the Christ movie as an ex-Christian ?

 

Christians see the movie for the spiritual experience, if an Ex-Christian member happened to have seen it, you saw it as a movie like a regular movie shown in the cinema, perhaps? For analysis or other reasons?

 

Thanks.

 

They showed it a couple of months ago here in Russia. I watched about 10 minutes of it and changed the channel. The violence they threw at that myth of a man would have killed a real person 30 times over. Pure Hollywood bullshit. Or in one word, disgusting.

[Mr. Neil]

They showed a small portion of it in the "The God Who Wasn't There" documentary. I agree. That guy would have been dead long before they put him on the cross. If that's what it was like for ninety minutes or so that I didn't see, yeah... there's no way.

 

I mean, the body only has so much blood. The amount of blood dripping and gushing out of that guy's body was about as ridiculous as what you see in the first three Mortal Kombat games. Heck, I think Mortal Kombat is more realistic than The Passion. At least in Mortal Kombat, the characters die!

[Christopher Carrion]

Speaking as the most atheist atheist in atheist land, I found the movie quite interesting in certain respects, and reprehensible in others. The manner in which it was shot was quite beautiful; as a cinematic work in and of itself it is genuinely brilliant. However, it is also extremely irresponsible in its implications, and the manner in which it was promoted. Gibson promotes himself as the uber-christian, yet he obviously hasn't paid much attention to the gospels as there are certain scenes in this movie which don't occur in any, and which are quite evidently specifically designed to whip Christians into a fugue of righteous despair (the infamous whipping scene with the hook-headed cat-o-nine tails, for example). Hellraiser ain't got nothing on the bibble for gratuitous violence, folks!

[BlueGiant]

Interesting depection of the stations of the cross (and very graphic). Ok, I'll admit it, I really didn't give a rip about the guy getting the shit kicked out of him on screen. In fact, with the gasps in the theater, my only thought was "lightweights." It was like they had never seen someone cut open before (got a chance to sit in on live surgery, interesting thing, camera does not do it justice).

 

Cinamatography was ok. Interesting choice for Satan. Latin was church Latin, not what would have been spoken at the time, and I could probably tell you which actors had studied the language in school (stilted delivery) and which hadn't. Most was probably taken straight from the Vulgate. Can't critique the Aramaic, though it was a nice touch.

 

Really it was much ado about noting (and Keanu outacted most of the cast in this movie in that one).

 

I saw it, and was asked afterwards if I thought it was spiritual. I asked if they thought seeing someone getting beaten was spiritual. They were polite enough to drop it after that.

[Sokudo Ningyou]

You mean "The Passion Of Mel's Violent Tendancies"? That movie was horrible. Cinematically pretty in places, but so absolutely empty of meaning or explanation it wasn't funny. And it definitely proves that Mel Gibson loves to jack off over meaningless violence, because, ok, I can understand that they'd be pretty bad-ass torturers back then, but there's no fucking way he'd survive that. Which I've argued with a few Christians. Who then said, "He's the Son of God, of course he could, that was the point." The POINT? The fucking point was, to my knowledge, that he was in a human body to suffer, which would mean he would only have a human's tolerance, not a (*&^$$ god's stamina, otherwise the point would be rendered moot. Nope. I'm stoopid.

 

And there's no way any skinny little vegan dude would survive that long. Bullshit.

 

 

Oh. And the splitting of the Temple? SO LAME. A homemade movie set would have been more realistic for gods' sakes.

[Christopher Carrion]

I agree with Blue Giant; the only reason people reacted in any way to the "violence" was due to its context. It seemed to be a particularly American phenomena in that a piece of cinema, a FICTION seemed to be interpreted by many as a Fly-On-The-Wall documentary, rather than a rather imperfect representation of an extremely dubious set of contradictory mythological documents.

 

Movies which are more poetic and considered in their use of violence:

 

-Hellraiser

-Kill Bill

-Hero

-House of Flying Daggers

-Saw

-Sin City

-Alien

-Hannibal

-Terminator

-Predator

-Akira

-Ghost in The Shell

-The Matrix

 

etc, etc.

[Mr. Neil]

I've noticed that the protagonists in Mel Gibson movies are always characters that have either come from tumultuous circumstances or is put through the wringer over the course of the movie. (except for Chicken Run, obviously) Take "The Roadwarrior" or "Lethal Weapon", where both characters lost their wives and were pushed to the edge emotionally.

 

It's steadily gotten worse over the years. I guess Braveheart was the first movie when it became blatantly obvious that Mel likes protagonists who are violently or emotionally tortured, but he officially started giving me the creeps around the time when he starred in Ransom. I was actually confused at one point, because I wasn't sure I was supposed to still be rooting for the Mel's character, who'd clearly flipped his lid abot halfway through the movie. It was apparent that the character was no longer thinking rationally or acting morally, but the movie was doing nothing to characterize him negatively. In fact, it vindicated his actions in the conclusion! What a horrible impression to leave upon the minds of the audience!

 

Of course, now that we see "The Passion", it all makes perfect sense. Mel loves Jesus, and he thinks the tortured hero architype is the only architype that should ever be used.

[Christopher Carrion]

Speaking of Braveheart, Mel also seems to have a passion (pun intended) for mangling actual history in the interests of promoting his own inflated sense of semi-religious nationalism. In particular, he seems to enjoy portraying the English as baby-eating rapists. What I'd like to know is if he's planning on ever producing a movie of the Crusades, or perhaps a scathingly graphic portrayal of the activities of the Spanish Inquisition? Thought not. There's something monstrously hypocritical about a guy who gets all het up over the historical atrocities attributed to a particular country then so ardently adheres to an ideology whose history of genocide, sadism, intolerance and general unpleasantness is the subject of legend.

[Darkenmoon]

I saw The Passion as an ex-Christian. I can totally agree with the people who compare it to or outright call it snuff. I found there was very little emotional involvement in it at all. I like some violent movies... but this one had no point I thought. Even in the end where they could have showed what the violence was for they seemed to only half-heartedly kind of maybe suggest it with a tiny wisp of time. If I hadn't known the myth, I wouldn't have cought the hint.

 

With all that... what bothers me the absolute most about this movie is that parents took 6 year old kids to see this junk. This movie was graphic and violent. Because of the things these kids are taught about Jesus, I think it would be a very traumatic experience for them. But even the violence is more then I would want to expose any kids I might have to.

 

The movie... was crap. Some very neat scenery. I liked what they did with Satan, although it reminded me MUCH more of Hecate then Satan. But I wouldn't give it even 1 star.

[Guest bdp]

My brother and his wife took their son - I think he was in sixth grade - with them to see it but not their daughter, who is two years younger. They've asked me if I've seen it and I say 'No,' and thankfully they don't ask anything more. One guy at work offered to loan it to me and I was noncommittal and he never brought it; just last week I heard he, a married guy, had been sexually active with (at least) two of the girls in the factory (I'm actually jealous of him over at least one of the girls in question). Makes me think 'You don't take all that Jesus stuff seriously, why should I?' Of course he might just like the movie as a 'snuff' film, as Dr. Neil has called it. I have absolutely no interest in ever seeing it.

 

bdp

[Cynical Realist]

I saw the movie in a state I would call semi Agnostic. I thought it was a very nice looking movie. Jesus getting the shit beat out of him was waaay over the top but hey, it's Hollywood so I didn't really mind all that much. The main problem with the movie, well one of the main problems is that you have no idea why Jesus is being beated and crucified? There's no back story. So unless you are a Christian or know the supposed reason why this is happening it makes no sense to you. I'm not bent out of shape over a movie. I saw it and after I saw it I didn't think about it like most hollywood movies I see.

However I would like some info on the Documentary "The God Who Wasn't There". If anyone has info on this I'd like to know how to see it.

[scotter]

I am quite taken aback that after the movie itself was shown for more than a year and more, it could still generate considerable discussions.

 

Another surprise is the assortment of opinions, there are unique, insightful and penetrating analysis by non-Christian members and ex-Christian members.

 

At that time from Ash Wednesday to Easter 2004 and later, I was also reading other discussions.

There was the rare occasion that Catholics and Protestants agree mutually --- the movie was good good good……with comprehensible attachments like Jesus died for the sins of the world, a basic course in Christian Christology, Theology of Salvation, Eschatology…..

 

The opinions generated since yesterday are indeed refreshing.

 

Again if I were to surmise if there is a movie about e.g. gangster gang fight and they slash out each other, quite some Christian commentaries would have condemned the movie violence (remember the Matrix?)…..

 

Now that the Passion of the Christ is so violent that a woman actually died of heart attack in the cinema, but because it is about Jesus Christ, then it is a good good good movie, and that puzzled me.

 

And there were non-religious commentators, professionals and occasional, when they expressed that they thought the movie was overly violent, the reflective responses were “You don’t know art…..Definitely you are not Christian, or you would have the contains to know the pain and suffering of Jesus.” Then pretty much the Christian responses were actually defending the violent depictions in the movie.

 

In this Passion of the Christ case, the more violent, the better, the defenders believe it renders the suffering of Jesus and the salvation more significant.

 

‘Just to add my thoughts also.

 

.

[Yaoi Huntress Earth]

I know what you mean Scotter. It's hypocrasy like that that makes me automaticly dismiss any time the fundies bitch about indecentsy. I hear that Gibson is planning to rerelease the movie with a PG-13 rating where a chunk of the worse parts will be cut out.

[Brutal Brian]

Never seen it and nor do I care to. Although seeing a movie about some guy getting beat up by his followers might be somethig right up my alley too, but nah. I'd rather see a movie about GW Bush getting ripped apart.

Oh wait a minute! I already did. It's called Farenheit 9/11 and directed by another fanatic named Michael Moore.

 

But I know Passion did make for some good comedic fodder on South Park....

[Sokudo Ningyou]

I know what you mean Scotter.  It's hypocrasy like that that makes me automaticly dismiss any time the fundies bitch about indecentsy.  I hear that Gibson is planning to rerelease the movie with a PG-13 rating where a chunk of the worse parts will be cut out.

 

 

 

That would cut the movie down to about ten minutes. Jesus in the garden, a few flashbacks, the temple falling; that would be about it. It'd be "The Passion Of Jesus For Dummies."

[imageownershipproblem]

I guess I'm in the minority in that I saw it in the theater as an xtian with both of my kids. Disgusting movie, fond memory. What twelve year old boy WOULDN'T love a day off of school to go see a horrifically violent movie with Mom's complete approval?

 

It actually did a lot to improve relationship tensions all around. Baby Girl, agnostic, age fifteen pointed out to Dumbshit Mommy that it wasn't just jeebus, it was an extremely common form of execution during that historical period. Why do we get so outraged about jeebus and yet we're incapable of giving a shit about poor falsely accused Johnus Doeus or Billius Bobbus Jimbous who was so damned broke and hungry that he didn't have any choice but to steal a loaf of bread and....

 

....oh yea, wrong movie....

 

Anywho, what really helped me and the boy was when I tried to confront him (being younger, more wowed by the cinematography, and therefore more impressionable) with the question, "And NOW do you believe that jeebus was the son of dog?"

 

My eyeballs popped out of my head and went rolling across the parking lot and almost got squashed under the wheels of a Mercedes when he very calmly replied, "No."

 

"But....but....but....but....what would it take for you to believe that he WAS the son of bob, a DNA test?"

 

"Mom, DNA tests aren't 100% accurate. Even in paternity suits there needs to be some other kind of evidence. A DNA test can prove that a man can't be the father of a child, but it can't prove that he is the father."

 

Like I've always said, I have a remarkable child.

[Fweethawt]

Like I've always  said, I have a remarkable child.

 

In a really strange way, he (your son) is a saviour in disguise.

Of course, even if he never realizes it, the future will.

 

 

[Sokudo Ningyou]

i haven't seen it.  I had no interest in seeing it.  As far as I'm concerned there is no reason to expose myself to emotionalist propoganda designed to keep the flock in line...and introduce newbies to the Jesus Loves you, look how much Meme.

 

When I was a Christian I had some serious issues with most of the bible.  It was a form of psychological torture and to put myself through watching a film like that would be like voluntarily walking up to a sadist and saying "here, torture me." 

 

As masochistic as I am, I'm not THAT masochistic.  Let's just stick with biting.  Watching people flayed alive in a fictional story touted as literally true which I was brainwashed with as a child is not my idea of fun.

 

Sure its a free country, watch what you want, but I don't understand this "ironman triatholon" mentality of some EX-C's like it's an endurance test to see how much Christian crap they can expose themselves to without going starkers.

 

I don't see this happening in other cults.  I dont' see Scientologists who get free, going back to audits as "ex-scientologists" to see what it's like...or see if they can "take it."  Most people who've left cults stay the fuck away.  Once you are free, why hang around the jail waiting to see if the warden recognizes you?

 

 

 

I saw it because I live with a Christian, and I was interested in the fact it was done in Aramaic and Latin. The fact it was about a mythical god-man was secondary. As a movie, I was interested; as propaganda, it was laughable. And if I'm going to be avoiding movies that uphold the Christian myth, I'm going to have to stop watching Indiana Jones.

[nirrti]

Yep, I went to see the movie while I was still a Christian back in the day and you know what happened? I fell in luv with Jeezus.

 

My po' brainwashed mind interpreted some guy's brutal torture and dying "for me" as proof of someone who truly loved me in a period in my life when I felt so alone. And to top it off, I believed if Jesus could withstand that big of an ass whuppin', why should I worry about my "petty little problems"?

 

Yeah, that movie can do a real Jedi knight trick of implying, "See how Jesus suffered because he loves you. If you don't believe, his execution would've been for nothing and you might as well have killed him yourself." Thank ya Jeezus, hallelujah!

 

Of course, a dead savior is, well, a dead savior and certainly can't talk, hug, kiss or comfort you when you're the one who's in pain. I found that out real quick when I suffered a major depressive episode shortly after (coincidence?) and found that "spirit" friends just don't do.

Come to think of it, would it have been a better gift, anyway, for Jesus to commit the rest of his life to doing loving things for people rather than being a martre? Would that've been a much better example of true sacrifice?

 

It didn't surprise me that Christians found the violence in the movie so appealing. What can you expect from folks who associate violence with Gawd's love in the first place?

 

Example:

 

"Jeezus loves you so much he died for your si'uns. Every blow he endured was him saying the words, "I love you."" or.........

 

"If you don't love him back, you'll go to hell, but his love for you is sooo deep he doesn't want to do that to you. and.......

 

"If you don't accept that he got the crap beaten out of him and crucified just for you, he won't have any other choice but to bring his wrath upon you." and of course........

 

"Don't make him hurt you, please, I beg of you. Accept him before he makes your soul burn for eternity for not accepting his gift of love. You have to understand, he can't help but destroy you because he's an all powerful and loving god and you're tying his hands with your unbelief"

 

Give me a fuckin' break!

[scotter]

Thanks IOP, Nirrti, that’s also the kind of posting I am looking for – back then the person saw the movie as a Christian, but now the person is no longer a Christian.

 

You hit it and you cut right through, Nirrti!

 

 

Quote from you Zoe:

 

but I don't understand this "ironman triatholon" mentality of some EX-C's like it's an endurance test to see how much Christian crap they can expose themselves to without going starkers.

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, whether you are referring to some EX-Cs here or those you acknowledge, I beg to disagree. Do ex-Christians read the Bible again? Certainly, but with a different perspective (if you say it is ‘Audit’, then it is). Ex-Christians seeing the Passion movie is just like Ex-Christian reading the Bible again, it is not necessarily a “high-profile” thing to do.

[Sokudo Ningyou]

'eh. It's only propoganda if you allow it to be.

 

Here; have some free silver jewelry and bask in your freedom.