xjwsforChrist

CHAPPY SAID

Any of you fans of JCSS? Universal will be putting out a DVD of the play. Tim Minchin plays Judas, which is ironically funny. I'm a fan of Tim. He is an outspoken atheist, but says he has always wanted to play Judas. His parents had the soundtrack on vinyl, and he said he wore it out while singing one of the Judas songs and making his parents listen over and over.

I got to see it. Can't say how. I thought it was very good.

AGUEST SAID

I haven't, dear Chaps (peace to you!). I haven't even seen "The Passion of Christ." Never will. Don't want to because I'm way too critical of almost ALL theater/screen productions. And so, unfortunately perhaps, when it comes to Christ I can't always handle the great amount(s) of "artistic license" that usually come with.

I think this is because of realizing how many also get their perception of God/Christ... from fictional accounts, as well as accounts "based on a true story" but not actually the true story. Like WTBTS "dramas" - LOLOLOLOL! I used to get "upset" when they would "interpret" something from the Bible in their "WTBTS" way so as to support their lesson/doctrine. Theatrics is a very powerful way to send a message.

I also have the see the movie before I can read the book. If I read the book first... and the movie is too far removed (like 2002 movie version of "The Count of Monte Cristo" with - what the FRICK was THAT??).

I'm sure JC Superstar is a WONDERFUL production, for those who love theater simply because it IS theater, but unless it's purely fiction, I need it to be somewhat close to the truth.

Peace!

Your servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

AGUEST SAID

Oops, didn't finish:

I also have the see the movie before I can read the book. If I read the book first... and the movie is too far removed (like 2002 movie version of "The Count of Monte Cristo" with - what the FRICK was THAT??)... I just get disgusted. I am just unable to separate to two different versions for the sake of "art." I realize people are entitled to their different opinions and interpretations, but I am a bit of a purist in that light.

Okay, done - LOLOLOL!

Peace!

SA

CHAPPY SAID

Oh, I'm never going to see Passion of Christ. Seems a bit sadistic to me.

On the other hand, Christianity has been defined so many different ways by so many different people, it does seem like a pretty good source to let creativity flow. Well known, a good point of reference.

Yet I LOVE stories that change POV. You may have heard of the musical Wicked. I went to see it---wonderful. However the book---GENIUS. It's a retelling of the Wizard of Oz from the POV of the witch. POV is everything. We never get to hear the witch's story except from those loyal to the Wizard, so she is simply wicked. But WHY is she wicked, and what is evil? Interesting study. What happens to give her such a reputation and what were her true motive? What was her childhood like? Why were those shoes so important to her? What did that road represent to those that were not fond of the Wizard? (Think of the Roman roads.) These are interesting questions to me, and exploring them is fun.

That author has retold several fairy tales. Confessions of a Wicked Step Sister is a retelling of Cinderella. Mirror, Mirror is a retelling of Snow White---which was really interesting because the role of wicked step mother was recast more as a guardianship, and Lucrezia Bourgeois was the guardian. With her reputation for poison, the apple fit in very nicely.

So JCSS, to me at least, seems to be the story from the POV of Judas. It's all fictional, of course, but looking at the possible motives of Judas is a lot of fun. He loved Jesus and followed him, but why would he turn him over? What scared him? What did he see happening?

So those things interest me. It's more a political story than a religious one (JCSS).

As far as books versus movies. I just try to view them as completely different entities. I don't expect the movie to retell the book, but I may like the movie, and the book, so I have two stories to enjoy.

King Arthur stories are that way (big fan). This myth has some basic constants, but after that, creative people play with them and tell their own stories. Mists of Avalon (books and movie) tells the story from the female perspective. Pretty cool. They look into Paganism (pretty much represented by most of the women) vs Christianity, but tell the Pagan side, which we don't usually get.

So Jesus is a cultural hero, not really belonging to any certain group, and cultural heroes tickle our creativity.

Alternative Universe stories do this too. They keep certain elements of the original story, but then change the context and details. I dislike the Fifty Shades Of Gray books, but they are really just an Alternative Universe telling of the Twilight books.

I love playing like that. I love POV studies. Every story can be told thousands of ways. Sometimes when I write a scene, I will rewrite it from a different character's POV. That can have surprising results, and inform me of things I had not thought of. It can also cause me to change a story a great deal, even if I keep the original POV. Responses will be more authentic if I have insight into other character's thought process, rather than just giving them canned or obtuse responses.

Sorry---I get a little excited over this subject, cuz I'm a nerd.

AGUEST SAID

Yes, I like POV takes, too, to some degree (and I did see "Wicked" - liked it, didn't love it - music too shrill for my taste and what, the Wizard had offspring??! Also, they only show him having one daughter... and wasn't there TWO "wicked" witches, sisters? C'mon... ). I can't WAIT to see "Oz", though!, but yes, I'm "worried" about all of those witches, too - LOLOLOL!

I don't think that JCS being from Judas' POV is my particular problem (whatever that could be is contrived anyway, no matter whose version, so no problem there) - I think it's just my own pendancy that does it with ALL "based on a true story" productions... or those that deviate from the original story. Again, I can see the movie FIRST... and THEN read the book... and love both. I just have difficulty doing the opposite: reading the book first then seeing the production. For some reason I "need" the movie to tell me the book story, if I well-remember the book story. Well, at least SOME semblance of it.

A good example was the recent TV series "Pillars of the Earth" (from Ken Follett's book of the same title). The TV production actually attempted to combine TWO books (that and his sequel, "A World Without End")... and so it just didn't make sense (to me). I just couldn't follow the storyline at all because it was often in SUCH dichotomy to the books. It was very confusing. I couldn't stay focused or captivated and so left off during the 2-3 episode.

Now, if I let some time go by... meaning several years... more than a decade, usually... THEN I can see the movie and view it as something entirely separate from the written original. But so long as the original is fresh in my mind (and I have a memory like a steel trap, unfortunately, so "fresh" usually means "within a decade or so")... it's quite difficult for me.

I do have "nerd" tendencies (my husband certainly is a nerd), too, though, and that's probably the problem (the "Sheldon" in me - LOLOLO! I'm actually prolly a "Leonard/Sheldon/Penny/Amy" hybrid, as I can see bits of myself in all of them - LOLOLOL!).

Peace

Your servant and a slave of Christ,

SA

CHAPPY SAID

In the book, you learn that the Wizard is not the father of both girls. They are half sisters. The book is much darker and more complex than the musical, naturally, and a much better story.

But the musical was fun. As long as it is not mistaken for the original story.

AGUEST SAID



Which boo... oh, you mean "Wicked: The Life and Times of...", yes. I haven't read that (but might, since I've seen the stage play first - LOLOL!). I thought you meant "The Wonderful Wizard of Oz" (which I read AFTER seeing the TV production "The Wizard of Oz").

I dunno, though: different strokes for different folks? In that light, how'd you like the "Lion King"?

Peace!

SA, on her own...

CHARIKLO SAID

I LOVE the Lion King!

CHAPPY SAID

Posted: Sun Feb 10, 2013 10:20 pm Post subject:
I liked the Lion King okay. The music was good. Disney kind of irritates me for a lot of reasons. But the music was fun.

YPPUPLLEH SAID

I have JEsus Chist Superstar on CD and I love that production

I saw the Passion of the Christ and I think some scenes were just overdone and a cheap stab at the audience. So not a fan of Passion of the Christ.
_________________
Love is a warm rubber puppy...

CHAPPY SAID



Do you have the 2012 version with Minchin? Or that 70's version, which was the only one I saw until this came out. I don't know if it is available for sale yet---I'll have to go check!

I went to a Catholic school for a couple of years, and they would cancel all afternoon classes in the final quarter and use the time to work on a play----always a musical. I was in Sound of Music and Oliver Twist. Anyway, they were set up for it. Since kids worked at their own pace, they would have figured out potential, and give guidelines for what had to be done by the end of the school year. So we would work independently when we weren't needed on stage, or working in scenery.

Anyway, there was some theatre company in the area that would recruit some of the kids for summer productions that traveled. They did JCSS and Godspell the summers I was there. I didn't do it, or see them, but pretty cool.

But then, they weren't too Catholicky. For our Christmas production, the nun had us sing Age of Aquarius! LOL She was a real hippy kinda gal.

A Pagan friend of mine told me that the Ursuline order (of which this nun was) has some pretty heavy pagan roots. It was a wa la! moment for me when I remember Age of Aquarius and my mom saying, "That isn't exactly a Christmas song!" LOL. She didn't care. We weren't Catholic or religious, she just found it funny.

Anyhoo----Love those 70's musical productions like Hair and JCSS.

PSACRAMENTO SAID

The passion of the Christ showed the crucifixion for what it was, one of the most brutal ways of torture-killing a human being.
In THAT regard, it is a movie that some people should see.

CHAPPY SAID

Why?

CHARIKLO SAID

Obviously, because it is brutal.

Really, as Yoda might say, there is no why. It just is, and the film showed it...in much too much detail, but that's just my view.

My imagination is very well able to fill in any amount of gaps, and I haven't yet met anyone who thought differently.

CHAPPY SAID

It wasn't obvious to me, though. That's why I asked.

Why would it be beneficial to some? Like what is the benefit. It's an honest question, not snarky. I know many people hold that opinion, but I've never really asked them why they did. Churches would rent out entire theatres to watch it.


Of course, you know that I'm an atheist, so the Christ story doesn't hold the same meaning for me, so this is an intellectual exercise. Respectfully, I will go with the assumption that the crucifixion story is true, for the sake of this discussion.

Why would it be beneficial to watch in great detail, the torture death of this person? What is the benefit? How should it make one feel? And most importantly, again respectfully going on the assumption that the story is true, would Jesus (or however you wish to address him) want us to take in these hollywoodized (made up word) details?

Crucifixion is arguably, one of the more brutal deaths thought up.

I guess I'm just saying that if I sacrificed my life, say for my daughter, I just wouldn't want her watching videos of me being shot in the head. It would not please me. She can appreciate my sacrifice. Perhaps she can make some good life decisions based on that sacrifice. But it somehow seems to cheapen it to me, to have someone that didn't witness it, try to recreate (impossible) the actual scene, and then display it all over the world and make millions of dollars off of it.

It feels almost pornographic to me. Even now, that I don't have an emotional attachment, thinking of watching it is distasteful to me, if for no other reason that I know many people DO have a strong attachment and love for the man being portrayed.

I, like you Char, have filled in many details with my imagination, as you know, I was once a very strong believer. I felt this way as a believer too, so it's not a challenge over belief, or really even meant to be inflammatory. I just realized, I never asked a person why they felt it was beneficial, and I'd like to know their point of view on the matter, since even when I believed I didn't hold the same POV.