Flipside Movie Emporium Forum Index Flipside Movie Emporium
Discussion Forums Locked & Archived for Browsing
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

The Passion of the Christ
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Flipside Movie Emporium Forum Index -> Movie Talk
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
the night watchman
Studio Exec


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 1373
Location: Dark, run-down shack by the graveyard.

PostPosted: 02.19.2004 3:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Third M?n wrote:
the night watchman wrote:


I have to assume he was being sardonic.


I assume he wasn't. Ebert probably loves Scorsese more than Gibson, I suppose.


Isn't it a tad unfair to make a judgement like that before even reading Ebert's review?
_________________
"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

-David Cronenberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The Third M?n
Studio Exec


Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 575
Location: Chasing Stef around post-war Vienna

PostPosted: 02.19.2004 6:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

the night watchman wrote:


Isn't it a tad unfair to make a judgement like that before even reading Ebert's review?


I wasn't really judging, just assuming. He most likely does, however. But, perhaps he has other "motives" for having given it such a rating.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
beltmann
Studio Exec


Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 2341
Location: West Bend, WI

PostPosted: 02.19.2004 10:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Third M?n wrote:
I was actually more interested in the clay wonders that they had done in The Miracle Maker [who's seen it?] than in the religious teachings that it gave.


Yeah, Miracle Maker is far more interesting in terms of technical achievement than in terms of drama.

Eric
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
GimmickAccount
Camera Operator


Joined: 06 Nov 2003
Posts: 87
Location: IW, dneB tseW

PostPosted: 02.19.2004 10:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why is it called the passion of the christ? Doesn't sound too good.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
beltmann
Studio Exec


Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 2341
Location: West Bend, WI

PostPosted: 02.19.2004 11:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

GimmickAccount wrote:
Why is it called the passion of the christ? Doesn't sound too good.


Because the term "the christ" initially meant "the messiah" or "the savior." It originated as a title, and only later became part of the name. To illustrate: The Passion of the Messiah sounds better than The Passion of Messiah. Gibson is merely using the term in its original sense. (Side info: Gibson preferred the simpler title The Passion until legal wrangling forced the change.)

Second linguistics note: The term "passion" here does not refer to extreme emotions but to suffering or agony. Perhaps Gibson ought to have named it The Suffering of the Savior?

Eric
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
the night watchman
Studio Exec


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 1373
Location: Dark, run-down shack by the graveyard.

PostPosted: 02.19.2004 11:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, "Christ" was used as a title, like Eric said. For more info follow this link.
_________________
"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

-David Cronenberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Danny Baldwin
Studio Exec


Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 1354
Location: San Diego, CA

PostPosted: 02.19.2004 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

beltmann wrote:
(Which raises Danny's comment regarding Ebert: How can we say he's opposed to religion in cinema when he awarded Last Temptation four stars? I don't recall him ever expressing contempt for religion in his reviews. I'm stumped by that one.)


Because back then he didn't have quite the following that would question his political affiliation if he gave something a good review, that wasn't in line with his politics.
_________________
Danny Baldwin

View My Reviews
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
beltmann
Studio Exec


Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 2341
Location: West Bend, WI

PostPosted: 02.19.2004 11:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Danny Baldwin wrote:
beltmann wrote:
(Which raises Danny's comment regarding Ebert: How can we say he's opposed to religion in cinema when he awarded Last Temptation four stars? I don't recall him ever expressing contempt for religion in his reviews. I'm stumped by that one.)


Because back then he didn't have quite the following that would question his political affiliation if he gave something a good review, that wasn't in line with his politics.


Back then? That was 1988. He had been writing reviews for 20 years and already had a very successful TV thing called Siskel & Ebert. I don't think much has changed since then.

I honestly don't recall Ebert ever attacking religion or religious people in his prose. Can you cite an example?

Eric
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
the night watchman
Studio Exec


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 1373
Location: Dark, run-down shack by the graveyard.

PostPosted: 02.20.2004 12:21 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Moreover, what exactly are Ebert's politics, how was Last Temptation "not in line" with those politics, and who has ever questioned his affiliation with anything based on any of his reviews?
_________________
"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

-David Cronenberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Danny Baldwin
Studio Exec


Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 1354
Location: San Diego, CA

PostPosted: 02.20.2004 12:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

beltmann wrote:


Back then? That was 1988. He had been writing reviews for 20 years and already had a very successful TV thing called Siskel & Ebert. I don't think much has changed since then.

I honestly don't recall Ebert ever attacking religion or religious people in his prose. Can you cite an example?


His success has only grown, but, what I'm saying is that, he's only recently been politically this swayed by people, even to the extent of changing his opinion because of it. This is not his opinion, it's the people pushing him. Would I call Ebert a sellout, even though still a great critic? Yes.

I'm not saying he's attacking religion; I know, in fact, his parents were religious, though I don't know about him. I'm simply saying that there is a liberal morale against this type of thing, not necessarily because of religious, but because of belief. This is only recognized now because it's regarding such a controversial film. You can't honestly say his liking of Bowling for Columbine and disliking of The Life of David Gale weren't somewhat because of his political side. Same goes for his choosing Sean Penn over Bill Murray for best actor; you could hear it in his voice. My comments are vulnerable to many attacks here, but what can I say? Bring them on, I guess.
_________________
Danny Baldwin

View My Reviews
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
the night watchman
Studio Exec


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 1373
Location: Dark, run-down shack by the graveyard.

PostPosted: 02.20.2004 1:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Danny Baldwin wrote:


he's only recently been politically this swayed by people, even to the extent of changing his opinion because of it.


When did he change his opinion on something?

Danny Baldwin wrote:
This is not his opinion, it's the people pushing him.


What "people," and how do you even know what his/their opinion of Passion is without reading his review?

Danny Baldwin wrote:
I'm simply saying that there is a liberal morale against this type of thing, not necessarily because of religious, but because of belief.


Liberals are against belief?

Danny Baldwin wrote:
This is only recognized now because it's regarding such a controversial film. You can't honestly say his liking of Bowling for Columbine and disliking of The Life of David Gale weren't somewhat because of his political side. Same goes for his choosing Sean Penn over Bill Murray for best actor; you could hear it in his voice.


Columbine is more liberal than David Gale? Sean Penn is more liberal than Bill Murray?
_________________
"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

-David Cronenberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Danny Baldwin
Studio Exec


Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 1354
Location: San Diego, CA

PostPosted: 02.20.2004 3:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not saying his opinion was changed, just brought out by popularity. We're studying this clearly by assumption--we don't know for a fact that he gave the movie 1-star--I'm just playing along. I'm speaking of liberals in general here, and how his political affiliations have pushed him in the past. I never meant to say liberals were against belief, but I must say they lead a heavy opposition to exhibiting it in film, for example.

Columbine is more liberal than David Gale? Sean Penn is more liberal than Bill Murray?[/quote]

Ebert's been quoted that Gale was counterproductive in bringing across the liberal point of view, and dehumanizing the group. Penn is definitely more liberal than Murray, or at least a part of a more liberal cast and crew. If he, Tim Robbins, Marcia Gay Harden, and Clint Eastwood aren't heavy liberals, I dunno what are.
_________________
Danny Baldwin

View My Reviews
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
the night watchman
Studio Exec


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 1373
Location: Dark, run-down shack by the graveyard.

PostPosted: 02.20.2004 7:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Danny Baldwin wrote:
I never meant to say liberals were against belief, but I must say they lead a heavy opposition to exhibiting it in film, for example.


First, be a little more specific about what you mean by "belief." I assume you mean belief in the Judeo-Christian god. Please list some examples of liberals opposing the exhibition of such belief in film. I hear about it all the time from the conservative sector, but have never witnessed it directly from the liberal side.

Danny Baldwin wrote:
If he [Ebert], Tim Robbins, Marcia Gay Harden, and Clint Eastwood aren't heavy liberals, I dunno what are.


I don't know how Ebert, Murray, or Harden lean politically, but I've never seen anything in Ebert's reviews or commentary that suggests he's a "heavy liberal," and Eastwood is a moderate Republican.
_________________
"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

-David Cronenberg


Last edited by the night watchman on 02.20.2004 7:35 am; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
the night watchman
Studio Exec


Joined: 27 Jun 2003
Posts: 1373
Location: Dark, run-down shack by the graveyard.

PostPosted: 02.20.2004 7:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[mispost]
_________________
"If you're talking about censorship, and what things should be shown and what things shouldn't be shown, I've said that as an artist you have no social responsibility whatsoever."

-David Cronenberg
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Danny Baldwin
Studio Exec


Joined: 26 Jun 2003
Posts: 1354
Location: San Diego, CA

PostPosted: 02.20.2004 11:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

the night watchman wrote:
I don't know how Ebert, Murray, or Harden lean politically, but I've never seen anything in Ebert's reviews or commentary that suggests he's a "heavy liberal," and Eastwood is a moderate Republican.


Ebert is, undeniably, a heavy left-winger, and shows this in interviews, rather than in his reviews, because it would lead his conservative readers to leave him. Harden is quite liberal, even though she isn't in the spotlight enough for people to notice. Murray I'm not sure on, but to call Eastwood Republican is a bit of a stretch.

***

As for examples, it's understood that liberals don't like public exhibition of religion in general. I'd have to dig to cite specific cases in film, as I will, but take, off hand, for example their criticizing conservative judges for using religion in making decisions. A tad too off-base, but when I get the time this weekend, I'll get you some articles and all that good stuff.
_________________
Danny Baldwin

View My Reviews
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    Flipside Movie Emporium Forum Index -> Movie Talk All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 2 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001-2007 phpBB Group