The Passion...

[PlayMSTie]

True. And also, I forgot to add one important thing: The Resurrection (knowing the end of the story, you might say) throws a different light on the whole thing.

[Pak-Man]

Yup. Sad story with a happy ending. :^)

[Variety of Cells]

As a Christian, let me take a stab at answering that, though I don't know how well I'll be able to articulate it: For us, it makes a difference that (1) this actually happened (we've heard the story in the Bible and in church and via dramatic re-enactments all our lives); (2) it was bloody and horrible and awful in reality (I was very young when I first heard about what crucifixion actually entailed, and believe me, it left an impression),  and (3) this was something that Christ went through for our sakes.

In a way it's a little like the difference between watching a movie about Anne Frank (this was real and happened to an innocent girl and we need to remember it) and watching a film about a fictional person being tortured by sadistic people just for the heck of it (hey, I just feel like watching someone suffer today).

Hard to explain, like I said, but there IS a difference.

And happy Easter!

Just because something never happened doesn't mean something can't be learned from it.  The Bible is full of stories that teach lessons, stories that never happened.  (And by that I mean the stories Jesus tells people)  But just because they never happened doesn't mean they are useless.  The film Se7en is full of gore, not as much as Passion, but something can still be learned from both films.  I wouldn't be so fast to dismiss all unpleasant fiction.  And I also don't feel it's wise to praise all unpleasant reality.  Just because something is unpleasant but really happened, does not mean it should be watched.  If you watch the Passion of the Christ a few times, eventually you are going to be desensitized to all the gore, even if it had actually happened. 

I'm sure you'll agree with most of that, unless the argument is made that The Passion of the Christ is just as meaningless as the snuff films you are referring to.  I can't say, because I haven't seen it.

[Hobbit]

The Passion is one of those movies that only strengthens whatever pre-concieved notion you have of it, most of the time.  If you walk in thinking it's going to be a historically accurate portrayal of Christ's suffering (with added Satan for freshness), then you'll walk out trying to figure out how the effects guys do it.  If you walk in thinking it's going to be an emotionally powerful film illustrating what Christ went through for the world, you'll likely walk out in tears, or at least in a very somber mood.  If you walk in thinking Mel Gibson's nuts, you'll walk out and immediately search for a place where you can have committment papers filed.  It's a film I only recommend for people who already think it'll be good in some way, and despite a huge push by a lot of groups to convince everybody to go see it, I think it's a bad idea for anybody to go see it if they don't really want to.

I also agree with the above poster on the gore.  This is not a film that your family will watch over and over again.  Maybe once every Good Friday with an additional screening at one or two church functions a year.  Any more than that and it'll either numb you or warp your mind.

[Phantom of Krankor]

I thought this was a very good and powerful film. It was also very gritty and had a sence of realism unlike the cheezy made for TV/ 50s adaptions of it. Because this really did happen. It had great cinematography, acting, and compelling score. I think Mel Gibson is a terriffic director. Because his recent film Apocalypto REALLY blew me away. Yes, this film is violent. But folks, this is what Jesus really went through. He really was whipped to the extent to where he was a big bloody mess.

And what's up with the acusations to Monty Python blood squirts? There's hardley any in this film at all. Only a few flecks of blood fly on the torturers as they whip Jesus, and once when he's crucified ( which isn't much of a squirt at all ).

[PlayMSTie]

As a Christian, let me take a stab at answering that, though I don't know how well I'll be able to articulate it: For us, it makes a difference that (1) this actually happened (we've heard the story in the Bible and in church and via dramatic re-enactments all our lives); (2) it was bloody and horrible and awful in reality (I was very young when I first heard about what crucifixion actually entailed, and believe me, it left an impression),  and (3) this was something that Christ went through for our sakes.

In a way it's a little like the difference between watching a movie about Anne Frank (this was real and happened to an innocent girl and we need to remember it) and watching a film about a fictional person being tortured by sadistic people just for the heck of it (hey, I just feel like watching someone suffer today).

Hard to explain, like I said, but there IS a difference.

And happy Easter!

Just because something never happened doesn't mean something can't be learned from it. 

Yes, you're absolutely right. I've been devouring fiction ever since I learned to read, so I couldn't agree more. But the question was, why would people who usually avoid ultraviolent films (like me) want to see this one? And my point was, if they're Christians, they often believe they have something very important to learn from this particular film.

[ScottotD]

As a Christian, let me take a stab at answering that, though I don't know how well I'll be able to articulate it: For us, it makes a difference that (1) this actually happened (we've heard the story in the Bible and in church and via dramatic re-enactments all our lives); (2) it was bloody and horrible and awful in reality (I was very young when I first heard about what crucifixion actually entailed, and believe me, it left an impression),  and (3) this was something that Christ went through for our sakes.

In a way it's a little like the difference between watching a movie about Anne Frank (this was real and happened to an innocent girl and we need to remember it) and watching a film about a fictional person being tortured by sadistic people just for the heck of it (hey, I just feel like watching someone suffer today).

Hard to explain, like I said, but there IS a difference.

Alright, let's leave the whole "it really happened" can of worms to the side for the moment.  To me, it was a movie and nothing more therefore to my eyes it was no more 'worthy' than any other movie so I reacted accordingly.  As an aside, I find it odd that your point seems to be that it's not alright to watch movies that have violence for entertainment ("hey, I just feel like watching someone suffer today") but it's fine when there's a specific lesson (although, as stated previously a lot of movies have lessons.

And what's up with the acusations to Monty Python blood squirts?

When he gets stabbed with the spear.

[Hobbit]

And what's up with the acusations to Monty Python blood squirts?

When he gets stabbed with the spear.
[/quote]

Scientifically accurate and in accordance with scripture.  According to scripture, when he was stabbed, there was quite a spray.  John 19:34 states, "But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out."  Medically, the conditions Jesus was under would have caused a buildup of fluid around his heart.  When the soldier stabbed him, the fluid was released, resulting in the spray portrayed in the movie.

[ScottotD]

I still thought it was funny.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

I still thought it was funny.

??  why?? 

[ScottotD]

because it was huge and cartoonish, also I think light came out as well (but I'm not sure) then the massively overdone music built up and the ground started to shake (which made the weird 80's Madonna video clip church shake).  I found it silly.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

granted youve admitted to actively disliking christians in other places on the forum so i have to ask.   did you go in with an objective mindframe or thought of it as a chance to see what those silly christians are doing now?   

Personally i found this movie hard as all get out to watch.  I watched it once, thought it was a great movie, and i never want to see it ever again. 

[RobtheBarbarian]

In his defense, when you see something you don't take seriously portrayed in an extremely dramatic manner, it can be kind of funny. Imagine watching a movie where someone brushes their teeth to Wilhelm Wagner music and shaking camera angles. Thus, as a (I assume) atheist, he wouldn't have the same respect for the crusifiction story and it wouldn't strike him in the same way as it would you.

[ScottotD]

granted youve admitted to actively disliking christians in other places on the forum so i have to ask.   did you go in with an objective mindframe or thought of it as a chance to see what those silly christians are doing now?   

Personally i found this movie hard as all get out to watch.  I watched it once, thought it was a great movie, and i never want to see it ever again. 

No, it was either that or AFL so I watched it.  I honestly was expecting it to be grim and boring but just found myself laughing at most aspects of it.  As Rob said and I stated previously, I had no reason to take it as either a historical piece or a reaffirmation of belief so I just watched (well, the second half) it as a movie.

[RandyMistie]

The story of Christ's sacrifice is as old as human civilization itself.  Every human society has a Hero myth that encapsulates the idea of a man (sometimes a woman) that gives his/her life for his/her people.  It is beautiful in every form.

Robthebarbarian associates himself with Norse mythology, can you tell us the relevant Norse myth?