The Moose Hole - Review of The Passion of the Christ

[MickeyMoose15]

Released February 25th, 2004

Director: Mel Gibson

Starring: James Caviezel, Monica Bellucci, Maia Morgenstern, Francesco Cabras, Rosalinda Celentano, Claudia Gerini, Ivano Marescotti, Matt Patresi, Sergio Rubini

Premise: The Passion of The Christ" is a film about the last twelve hours of Jesus of Nazareth's life. The film opens in the Garden of Olives (Gethsemane) where Jesus has gone to pray after the Last Supper. Jesus resists Satan's temptations. Betrayed by Judas Inscariot, Jesus is arrested and taken back to within the city walls of Jerusalem where the leaders of the Pharisees confront him with accusations of blasphemy and his trial results in a condemnation to death. Jesus is brought before Pilate, the Roman Governor of Palestine, who listens to the accusations leveled at him by the Pharisees. Realizing he is confronting a political conflict, Pilate defers to King Herod in the matter. Herod returns Jesus to Pilate who gives the crowd a choice between Jesus and the criminal Barabbas. The crowd chooses to have Barabbas set free and condemn Jesus. Jesus is handed over to the Roman soldiers and flagellated. Unrecognizable now, he is brough back before Pilate, who presents him to the crowd as if to say "is this not enough?" It is not. Pilate washes his hands of the entire dilemma, ordering his men to do as the crowd wishes. Jesus is presented with the cross and is ordered to carry it through the streets of Jerusalem all the way up to Golgotha. On Golgotha, Jesus is nailed to the cross and undergoes his last temptation - the fear that he has been abandoned by his Father. He overcomes this fear, looks at Mary, his Holy Mother, and makes the pronouncement which only she can fully understand, "it is accomplished." He then dies: "into Thy hands I commend my Spirit." At the moment of death, nature itself overturns.

What has this country come to when a man can’t make a purely inspirational retelling of a story that is the basis of his entire religious beliefs? Has America become a fascist state? Is the United States of America under Communist control? That would appear so with the immense outcry against Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ from the Jewish community who believes this will result in a resurgence of anti-Semitic feelings amongst the movie-going public, a claim that has no justification. Too many people in this country have fallen for the liberal lie of “Separation of Church and State” which does not exist in any shape or form in the United States Constitution. The only thing that comes close to that is the “Establishment Clause” which states that federal government will not choose any religion for the basis of its country nor will it restrict religious freedom. Hmmm … That’s funny! Doesn’t sound like our country today, now does it? ....

Click Here to Read the Full Review!

[JustaFied]

He's got the right to make this movie (he did make this movie) and people have the right to criticize it. That's freedom of speech. Where has the government been involved in this at all? How does this have anything to do with the Establishment clause of the 1st Amendment?

[MickeyMoose15]

What I am saying is that the radicals are trying to restrict religion in America. You had activist judges out there making decisions to remove The Ten Commandments from public view in a governmental place of business and you have several politicians advocating that 'God' be removed from money, the pledge of alligiance, etc. The government is being too restrictive of religion in the modern day and this relates to this film. I am not saying the government wants to restrict this film but that they are restricting Jesus (God) in almost every other place.

I am also referring to the many people who are saying Mel Gibson should not make this film because he is a traditionalist christian and the comments made by his father.

I am siding with Mel Gibson ... Don't take my sarcasm too seriously.

[JustaFied]

People have the right to say Mel Gibson shouldn't have made this movie or at least that he should have done it differently. It'll probably be a big hit at the box office, and that's what dictates these things in the end, actually.

I would say that it's the radicals who are trying to impose religion upon America. The rest of us just want the freedom to choose, yes or no.

The federal judge had the the Ten Commandments removed from a state building. You are free to post them at your home or your place of business or anywhere else. The government is not restricting practice of religion otherwise. You can go to church or synagogue or mosque whenever you choose.

Other than that, I'm glad to hear your opinion on this movie. It's generating quite a buzz in this country, isn't it?

[MickeyMoose15]

People have the right to say Mel Gibson shouldn't have made this movie or at least that he should have done it differently. It'll probably be a big hit at the box office, and that's what dictates these things in the end, actually.

I am not saying they don't ... I just believe they have no basis to say it since they are making comments about how this MIGHT cause anti-Semitism but they haven't even seen the film and some even refuse to see it.

I would say that it's the radicals who are trying to impose religion upon America. The rest of us just want the freedom to choose, yes or no.

I think it is the other way around ... Protestanism (a branch of Chrisitianity) was the founding religion of this country and no one can deny that, therefore we should have slightly more embraciveness toward it. The "Establishment Clause" advocates the freedom of religion but ALSO the right not to restrict it, which I think that is what they are doing with Christianity.

The federal judge had the the Ten Commandments removed from a state building. You are free to post them at your home or your place of business or anywhere else. The government is not restricting practice of religion otherwise. You can go to church or synagogue or mosque whenever you choose.

But if you don't like it then don't look at it. There are tons of art work out there that is in public view that many people find offensive or something to that nature but it remains there because you have people who complain it is "freedom of expression". Allowed to have your opinion, I just don't agree with it in part.

Other than that, I'm glad to hear your opinion on this movie. It's generating quite a buzz in this country, isn't it?

$20 million possibly on opening day ... I'd say so. Thanks for the comments.

[oscar jubis]

Originally posted by MickeyMoose15
Protestanism (a branch of Chrisitianity) was the founding religion of this country and no one can deny that, therefore we should have slightly more embraciveness toward it.

The rest of us second-class Americans be damned. I will fight you and your cohorts to the last drop of blood to keep you from turning AMERICA into a theocracy.

[MickeyMoose15]

In something like "God we trust" or "under God" that can be interpreted to mean any god, not just the particular God of the Christians.

There is no denying our American society is based on the early Anglo-Saxon religion and there should be no problem with that I believe.

I grew up in a Christian environment (and I not being very Catholic), so I am taking this from experience from where I am coming from.

[JustaFied]

Originally posted by MickeyMoose15
In something like "God we trust" or "under God" that can be interpreted to mean any god, not just the particular God of the Christians.

But what about those who don't believe, or "trust", in any God? Don't they have a right to use currency that doesn't refer to a deity? Kidding, in a way, because I think that's a relatively harmless example. But "establishment of religion" is fairly established in our County; did you know the U.S. Senate has a chaplain on its payroll, and they open every session with a prayer. How's that for separation?

Have you read Jefferson's "Letter to the Danbury Baptists"? He wrote it in 1787 (or so) and in it he emphasizes the importance of creating "a wall between church and state". He uses those exact words, so this idea in our soceity is not a new one. It's also part of our tradition, just as the underlying Christian morality may be. Many Supreme Court decisions over the years have reinforced this "wall".

Are you really 17 (as your profile indicates)? I admire your passion about these issues as well as your interest in movies. Keep an open mind, and always hear out the other side. That's freedom of speech!

[MickeyMoose15]

But what about those who don't believe, or "trust", in any God? Don't they have a right to use currency that doesn't refer to a deity? Kidding, in a way, because I think that's a relatively harmless example. But "establishment of religion" is fairly established in our County; did you know the U.S. Senate has a chaplain on its payroll, and they open every session with a prayer. How's that for separation?

Atheism, in my opinion and the opinion of many philosophers, leads to anarchy and/or trouble in that's person's life and with themselves. The inclusion of the word "God" on currency, in the pledge, etc. shows that the United States is a country that respects values, morals, has a "connection" with divinity, in a way or, better yet, a concrete sense of right and wrong.

We also have the belief in this country of majority rules and, not saying this works all the time, but Catholics are in the majority here in America, so it makes sense the government would side more with them then say Buddism or Hindu or something like that.

Have you read Jefferson's "Letter to the Danbury Baptists"? He wrote it in 1787 (or so) and in it he emphasizes the importance of creating "a wall between church and state". He uses those exact words, so this idea in our soceity is not a new one. It's also part of our tradition, just as the underlying Christian morality may be. Many Supreme Court decisions over the years have reinforced this "wall".

But in the process, that wall is restricting Christianity. There is a great respect in this country for many religions (Islam, on the decline due to the events of Sept. 11th, sad to say) but Catholicism has been a religion that has been severely bashed by nativists of this country, due to the large amount of unskilled Catholic immigrants who, for minimal pay, took the jobs of many Americans, not just in the late 1800's but the early 1900's as well. Many don't remember that the KKK, after WWI, went after, not just blacks, but Jew, Catholics, immigrants, and anybody else who didn't apply to their line of Protestant thinking.

Based on Jefferson's letter, you have to remember that Jefferson was a deist, who believes that God created the world but just left it to work like a clock and that God would not interfere with the world, except for a few moments of deep necessity. Here is the more specific term: The word "Deism" is derived from the Latin word for God: "Deus." Deism involves the belief in the existence of God, on purely rational grounds, without any reliance on revealed religion or religious authority. So, I think this is what our government was presenting what Deists did in their religion, a recognition of God in our currency, monuments, etc.

And, at the time of the letter, the Americans were still in a deep war (of words and feelings) with the British and therefore has great resentment of them, including the idea of the Church of England. So, in part, there is some conflict of interest from Jefferson, who still felt hostile to the British sense of rule with their church.

I am guess it comes back to that "Ten Commandments" in Alabama. By taking that away, that contradicts the "freedom of religion". Granted the government isn't suppose to take up any singular religion but more religious convictions have been taken up by people since the early days of the country especially during and after the Civil War.

But this is just where I am coming from.

Are you really 17 (as your profile indicates)? I admire your passion about these issues as well as your interest in movies. Keep an open mind, and always hear out the other side. That's freedom of speech!

Thanks. I try my best to listen to everyone's opinion.

[HorseradishTree]

Originally posted by MickeyMoose15
In something like "God we trust" or "under God" that can be interpreted to mean any god, not just the particular God of the Christians.

And what of those who do not wish to delve into the possibility of something higher than themselves?

Are we just supposed to have religion shoved into our faces everywhere we turn?

[MickeyMoose15]

You can ignore it. You don't hear the cries of the atheists out there saying this is horrible or discriminatory or something like that. If this was a really big problem, wouldn't you think the Hindus or Muslims or whatever would be voicing their protest as well? But they aren't.

Unfortunately they are in the minority in this country and in most large countries as well.

I don't want to get into a heated battle of "my God is better then your whatever" ... This is how I view it and all I know is that Christianity is in the majority and that everybody is just going to have to tolerate it because it's not like it is saying "CONVERT UNBELIEVER" or something like that. But that's just me.

[HorseradishTree]

Well, I'm glad that's how you feel, but unfortunately that's not how everyone is. A girl at school told me this straight to my face:

"Don't you find it disheartening that you're going to hell?"

Yikes. I don't think she has too many friends.

[MickeyMoose15]

That is in bad taste, definite to say.

[JustaFied]

Mickey,

There's a thread here a few down from this one that's titled "Religion in Cinema". Read through the posts there, they're all extremely interesting and well-written, particularly those from Anduril, a guy who's studying for his Ph.D. in theology. He knows his stuff.

In particular, there are several posts relating to the anti-semitism that's surrounded the death of Jesus both at that time and in the 2000 years since. It might be valuable in helping to better understand the Jewish community's sensitivity to this subject and this film.

[MickeyMoose15]

Thanks.