xjwsforChrist

CHAPPY SAID

Just to highlight a bit more, there is the scourging scene in JCSS, and even that made me flinch. So perhaps I'm overly sensitive. When he rolls over on his stomach, and you see the marks, I just cringe.

And whether this story was accurate or not, I KNOW that this was a real penalty and that real people went through this, and it saddens me. Over the years, humans have devised some very creative and painful means of death, often involving a religious motivation, and some of it still happens today. They just burned a woman alive in New Guinea because they accused her of witchcraft. Just the thought makes me ache. I'm trying to think of one benefit I would get by watching that in great detail, with camera angles and music meant to intensify the emotion. Even if I witnessed such in person, I would not have had that.

TEC SAID

I also have not watched JCS, or the Passion of the Christ, or any other plays, adaptations, movies, whatever... of anything to do with Christ. I realize that some people are doing it to pay homage, and there's nothing wrong with that... or in watching them.

But for me, I have no real desire to do see them. I don't tend to like the 'hollywoodization' (okay if that is a word, I definitely did not spell it right)... of Christ and God. Mind you, I have seen a couple of the Charlton Heston movies... hubbie loves those. Loves Yul Brenner the most I think

Since I have not seen the PotC, then I can only go by what others have said about its graphic nature. But people make detailed and harsh movies about things like the holocaust... I think the point is so that the viewer can more fully grasp what those people went through, rather than being able to dismiss it or sweep it under the rug.

What Mel Gibson was thinking... I don't know. I've never read what he has to say about it.

I have no desire to see it though.

Peace,
tammy

CHAPPY SAID

Oh, Mel was thinking lots of things.

I'm more interested in the comment that some people should see the movie. I want to know why some of those people think it is beneficial. It's a bit hard to sweep the crucifixion under the carpet, as it is everywhere, so I don't think that is it.

TEC SAID

I will leave Paul to answer that, then. Though I believe he said 'some' people should see it.

Peace,
tammy

TEC SAID

LOl... and apparently you also said 'some' people. Sorry

Peace,
tammy

CHAPPY SAID

t



Yes, some people. Now I'm curious at to what people.

Since we were talking POV, and I've let it be known that it is a geeky interest, this has really caught my imagination.

Paul, I am not brow beating you. This has just set off some random thoughts and questions, not necessarily directed at you.

There is a certain level of emotional manipulation with such things. As I said before, even if I had witnessed such an event, I would not get the same details, nor the effects meant to make it even more emotional. I may not see a lot of it. I may block a lot of it. I may look away. Movies are crafted to keep one from looking away.

Now to play with POV some.

Perhaps some have the opinion that seeing this graphic detail, that likely wasn't even available at the real execution, think it is beneficial because it makes people appreciate the sacrifice more (I never needed that when I believed, but I'm positing here), which in turn manipulates the emotions toward the outlook the movie is leading one to.

Would those same people feel the same if other executions were graphically shown? Think about Noah's flood. Would these same people feel it would be beneficial to watch babies drowned? Or puppies. Or whatever. I won't get graphic, but I imagine the carnage of that flood was much more overwhelming than the death of one person, simply because the suffering was so much greater.

So what would happen to the emotions? Would we feel pity? FEAR? Anger? Disgust? Gratitude?

Cue music.

I think a lot of the emotions one would experience watching graphic depictions of Noah's flood would not be the emotions that a person who thinks PotC is beneficial would want stirred up. So would they think that was a bad idea, but PotC a good idea?

That was awkward wording.

Is the benefit the emotional angst, and is that a good thing?

Interesting to think about.

I was watching a video of Minchin reciting a poem. The camera started, floating, I guess you'd call it. It twisted and turned, and completely set a tone that may have been lost if I'd seen it live. It was a great effect and added to the humor. Stagecraft.

I think PotC is a LOT of stagecraft, and not truly reality. I think it is meant to ramp up emotion to a level that may even be artificial.

And so that brings me back to the question, would Jesus have wanted that? Would he have wanted emotions manipulated in such a way? Not that we would be robots, but natural emotion is very different from manipulated emotion, IMO. It can make things funnier, sadder, sexier. That sells videos.

Is that the way Jesus would have wanted it to go though?

Nothing I've read about him would suggest so.

Lot's to think about.

I think of Pentacostals, and how they rev up the emotions. I've been to some of their things, and it disturbed me. I don't know how to put it other than it doesn't feel like a natural response when someone is manipulating me and directing me toward something.

It can be fun to a degree, but there is just a line that it shouldn't cross.

YPPUPLLEH SAID

Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 2:36 am Post subject:
There is a belief that people have glossed over the crucifixion. That it is so far removed from their daily lives that they just refer to it by name but do not really understand the ferocity of the act. People can imagine what it was like but a visual and aural demonstration with good acting makes it more real for them.

It is human to sympathize. We see people suffering and most of us want it to stop. Tortures on par or even worse than what was shown in Gibson's film occur in modern times. I've seen videos(you can find them if you really wish to on the Internet) that show people being killed via various means. The ones who were affected by the movie want others to share that moment.

That movie was Mel Givson's interpretation of what occurred or might have occurred many years ago. Yes it is fine tuned to affect the viewers, yes it was emotionally manipulative, and yes it was used by many to either strengthen their faith or to spread their faith.

I was okay with it for the most part but when the torture scenes went into marathon mode I lost some respect for it because it was too gratuitous. Also, at the time, lol i think some of the Jewish organizations weren't too keen on the movie as well
_________________
Love is a warm rubber puppy...

CHAPPY SAID

Yeah, I remember the Jewish orgs being upset. I remember thinking he is telling the story as written, and to ask him to change it would be akin to asking us to remove the German involvement in a Holocaust movie.

On the other hand, Mel's true feelings about the Jews has come out repeatedly, so perhaps there were some things in there I was not aware of. Don't know.



So do you think a better way may be to teach them to appreciate and not gloss over---willingly----or to put it in their face and try to extract it from them?

WWJD?

AGUEST SAID

Personally, I don't have to see a reenactment of my Lord's death to know how brutal is was for him (peace to you, all!); truly, that is what holy spirit is for: to help one have "the mind of Christ." Given that, there is NO way I could have sat through it visually... having experienced it spiritually (including the pain and agony, albeit greatly "muffled" for MY flesh's sake; but my spirit certainly went through it! Think "Stigmata" only not as bloody).

Should we keep remembering Christ's death, literally? Perhaps some believe we should. Perhaps for them it is a reminder. For me, partaking of his flesh... and listening to his voice... is that reminder - my heart "fills" each time, although I might not manifest that before others (it is quite personal, actually). It was one of the reasons the WTBTS Memorial was/is so... disrespectful to me: they have a FORM of "godly devotion"... with all of their pomp and reading of Bible verses... yet, they don't allow EVERYONE to "proclaim" that death... literally.

Which is the point: not just to remember that he died... but to PROCLAIM his death... because he LIVES.

Trust me, no matter what Mel Gibson's (who was apparently taking taking out some of his animosity with Jews) reasons were... unless HE was guided by my Lord, the Holy Spirit, by means of holy spirit... I knew that he was gonna take a lot of artistic license, too.

And for me, when it comes to telling about Christ, the Truth... I prefer the truth, not art. So, I prefer to get it straight from the mouth of the "horse." Or should I say... Lamb.

Peace!

A slave of Christ,

SA

YPPUPLLEH SAID







I believe that each group of people have a way that is best for them.
_________________
Love is a warm rubber puppy...

YPPUPLLEH SAID

And I've only seen the 70's version of the Rock Opera can only imagine what the modern day version is like

Is the music the same or slightly modified?
_________________
Love is a warm rubber puppy...

CHAPPY SAID



Yes they do. Which is why I asked why they felt this way, so's I could understand. That's how all this started. I asked WHY some thought it would be beneficial for SOME to see the movie, and then I offered my opinion on why that didn't make sense to me, even when I believed.

No matter what, it's a Hollywood, ramped up version of something that would not have appeared that way even in real life. So why look to Hollywood for the spiritual answers? It's interesting.

YPPUPLLEH SAID

hollywood is a form of storytelling. From oral traditions passed down, to written stories, live plays, to movies.

The storytelling is there but the methods are changing.

It brings it to a larger mass audience l
_________________
Love is a warm rubber puppy...

YPPUPLLEH SAID

Many years from now, or even now, films will be seen as humanities lessons, parables, teaching, entertainment, passing down of myths, etc

Our movies are the bards of yesteryear
_________________
Love is a warm rubber puppy...

CHAPPY SAID



It seems to be the same---different singers, but the same music.

The only 'modernized' parts was the context. Texting, Game Show (Herod plays a reality game show host and lets the audience text in their vote---Lord or Fraud), that kind of thing. But same music.

When Herod opens it to a vote, a disclaimer flashes on the screen that the results were already predetermined by Herod who has already decided fraud, or else this would be the shortest Act 2 ever. That's a paraphrase, but I actually rewound and paused so I could read it all. LOL