elinz Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 This movie is likely to be as significant culturally as "Schindlers List" was. There are many issues that might be raised about it: 1. Is the anti-semitic claim valid? Is the Jewish population simply happier if the story of Christ never gets told? 2. What about the teachings of Christ? There's apparently nothing but the crucifixion. Catholics focus on the crucifixion, but the LDS church does not to such a degree. Is this a bad thing from the LDS perspective? 3. Given that the movie skips over the life of Jesus does that give plenty of room for the Mormon Movie business to create it's own identity in the media that is not in direct competition with mainstream Christianity? 4. What can you say about character assassination as far as the people involved in this movie? Okay, that will get you all started. If anyone can think of other issues go right ahead... B) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tr2 Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Is this a bad thing from the LDS perspective?This movie is going to place a lot of significance on something that the LDS church does not value as a significant thing. I have never talked to a mormon who talked like they thought the cross was as important as Christians think it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elinz Posted February 17, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Originally posted by Tr2@Feb 17 2004, 09:46 AM Is this a bad thing from the LDS perspective?This movie is going to place a lot of significance on something that the LDS church does not value as a significant thing. I have never talked to a mormon who talked like they thought the cross was as important as Christians think it is.I just wonder if it will become a competition or if itwill become a cooperation. Once this movie is overthere isn't much in the way of a sequel.In some ways this will further open the publics interestin religious material. "Joan of Arcadia" is a verypopular tv show and it never mentions Christ orthe cross. (at least so far)Being an optimist I'll say it's a good sign... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jenda Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 In this time, it is the going thing to deny that Jesus was the Christ. That he was the divine son of God who came to earth to die for our sins. Millions of (Christian) children are growing up without this teaching as part of their belief system. I believe it is time for those who do continue to believe that to take a stand. It is the only way that that message will continue through to the next generation. I applaud Mel Gibson, and the others who have been ostrasized, for being willing to put their careers on the line to stand up for what they believe in the day and age that it is popular to take no stand at all. Praise God! that he created people with such strong beliefs and the will to do what is right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elinz Posted February 17, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 I agree 100%. The culture war in America is getting more vicious all the time. The pro-sin-freedom-expression side seems to be winning unfortunately. Now is the time. People are ready to hear the other side again and if done well the tide might turn. Even if it doesn't, the tragedies that the expression side lead us into will ultimately end in collapse. After the fall, the survivors will be trained and ready to start again. The cycle goes on and on... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tr2 Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 I just wonder if it will become a competition or if itwill become a cooperation.It will not. Our churches are set up in such a way that one cannot follow both. You follow one, the other, or neither. The core doctrines of mormonism and Christianity are so different that they cannot work towards the same goal, because both have different goals. This may be unpopular, but it is the way it is. I applaud Mel Gibson, and the others who have been ostrasized, for being willing to put their careers on the line to stand up for what they believe in the day and age that it is popular to take no stand at allI'll have to agree. Though, based on the interview I saw last night with Mel Gibson and Barbara Walters, he has gotten wierd. Is it a good weird? I do not know the man so I cannot determine that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest curvette Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Great questions Elinz. I have no idea what the answers are, but here are my humble opinions: 1. The Anti Semitic claim has merit in two ways (IMHO.) Jewish people still have a persecution complex (rightfully so.) Of course they are going to be hyper sensitive to a blockbuster film which, they feel, paints their ancestors in a negative light. The second validation is because Mel Gibson's dad leans towards anti Semitism. Gibson has made it clear that he doesn't share his dad's views, but has stopped short of publicly stating that he DISAGREES with his dad. I assume this is for the sake of family harmony. 2. Gibson is a Catholic and so his focus is on the passion. I think he feels that a story worth telling is worth telling well. To tell the story of Christ's life in it's entirety was attempted in Franco Zeffirelli's "Jesus of Nazareth." It was a gorgeous film, but had to be shown as a TV miniseries because it was six hours long. I think the lack of Christ's teachings would be a 'bad thing' from the LDS perspective, but most devout LDS will not be seeing the film due to it's R rating. 3. I don't understand this question. I don't think the church has any intention of ever entering the commercial film market. Do you mean independent LDS filmmakers? So far they seem to focus only on the things uniquely Mormon (missions, temple marriage, BOM, etc.) 4. I guess I haven't heard anyone's character being assassinated. I've heard the film criticized and Gibson's dad criticized, but I haven't read any direct insults (with any merit) directed personally at Gibson or the cast. I would be interested in hearing what has been said. Do you have any links? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elinz Posted February 17, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 "The core doctrines of mormonism and Christianity are so different that they cannot work towards the same goal, because both have different goals." "...last night with Mel Gibson and Barbara Walters" I don't think it was Barbara Walters. Was it "Primetime Special Edition" on ABC? Mainstream Christianity and the LDS Church are not totally different. Obviously the "fixed creed" aspect of most mainstream churches goes against the idea of revelation and building testimonies, but the bible is still mostly the same between the two. Sin is still error, though most Catholics figure a confession will due as a cure rather than serious work and change. I'd say the LDS Church is simply more serious about things than the other Churches. Sort of the Marines vs. the National Guard? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elinz Posted February 17, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Originally posted by curvette@Feb 17 2004, 12:29 PM3. I don't understand this question. I don't think the church has any intention of ever entering the commercial film market. Do you mean independent LDS filmmakers? So far they seem to focus only on the things uniquely Mormon (missions, temple marriage, BOM, etc.) Yeah, I was talking about the independent filmmakers.Mel Gibson is an independent, but he created a filmthat defines the Catholic perspective.I'm just not sure they're mutually exclusive.Catholics obsess about the cross, while the LDSfolks focus on the teachings.Need there be a monopoly?Or is the crucifiction so shocking that it will scareanyone away from being / thinking like Jesus?Is that the real Catholic message?"Think like Jesus and this is what you get!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starsky Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Originally posted by Jenda@Feb 17 2004, 09:58 AM In this time, it is the going thing to deny that Jesus was the Christ. That he was the divine son of God who came to earth to die for our sins. Millions of (Christian) children are growing up without this teaching as part of their belief system.I believe it is time for those who do continue to believe that to take a stand. It is the only way that that message will continue through to the next generation. I applaud Mel Gibson, and the others who have been ostrasized, for being willing to put their careers on the line to stand up for what they believe in the day and age that it is popular to take no stand at all.Praise God! that he created people with such strong beliefs and the will to do what is right. Here here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Starsky Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Originally posted by Tr2@Feb 17 2004, 11:24 AM I just wonder if it will become a competition or if itwill become a cooperation.It will not. Our churches are set up in such a way that one cannot follow both. You follow one, the other, or neither. The core doctrines of mormonism and Christianity are so different that they cannot work towards the same goal, because both have different goals. This may be unpopular, but it is the way it is. I applaud Mel Gibson, and the others who have been ostrasized, for being willing to put their careers on the line to stand up for what they believe in the day and age that it is popular to take no stand at allI'll have to agree. Though, based on the interview I saw last night with Mel Gibson and Barbara Walters, he has gotten wierd. Is it a good weird? I do not know the man so I cannot determine that. I think when you are underfire by so many powerful people, you get weird. I mean really...all I saw was a great insecurity in the man. He was nervous as all get out...and being asked to screwtinize his own depth and feelings on national tv.Consider this....BW had all the background, interviews, newspapers, etc...all electronically at her disposal during that interview...while poor ol' Mel was sitting their all by himself trying to explain spirituality to a harden reporter who gave every indication that she thought he and his works were crap and anti-semetic.It would be like a newly baptised member who was also new to the internet, coming up against one of the most informed, and expert anti-mormon....on national tv....with the anti having everything he was going to say...documented and ready for display.Geeewhiz.....that was the worst interview I have ever witnessed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest curvette Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Originally posted by elinz@Feb 17 2004, 12:16 PM Yeah, I was talking about the independent filmmakers.Mel Gibson is an independent, but he created a filmthat defines the Catholic perspective. No, I don't think any LDS filmmaker is up to the task. Mel Gibson is a mega superstar with tons of experience in filmmaking and lots of money to back a commercial venture like this. There are no LDS filmmakers with anywhere near his resources. Many people will see Gibson's film simply because they like Mel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elinz Posted February 17, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 People keep referring to a Barbara Walters interview with Mel Gibson. Are we really talking about Diane Sawyer? Primetime Special Edition ABC 12 Feb 16 09:00pm Special/Other, 60 Mins. "Mel Gibson's Passion" Director Mel Gibson discusses the controversy surrounding his film, "The Passion of the Christ''; Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, shares his views on Gibson's film. Original Airdate: February 16, 2004. Or did Barbara Walters have here own at another time? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest curvette Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 I saw the Diane Sawyer interview. I thought she interviewed him well and that he answered well. The only time I saw him get uptight was when she questioned him about his father. He told her to back off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elinz Posted February 17, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 I agree, the Diane Sawyer interview went well except for the section involving his father. Mel is human too. It did seem like a little bit of a character assassination the way they presented it. "Mel Gibson, the secretive son of an anti-semite" "What does he have to hide?" (is what was implied) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest curvette Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Originally posted by elinz@Feb 17 2004, 01:10 PM I agree, the Diane Sawyer interview went well exceptfor the section involving his father.Mel is human too.It did seem like a little bit of a character assassinationthe way they presented it."Mel Gibson, the secretive son of an anti-semite""What does he have to hide?" (is what was implied) I think he came across as being a very loyal son. He made it clear that he disagrees with his father's views on the holocaust without actually saying "My dad was wrong." I suspect his dad is a very eccentric, proud person and might cut off communication with his son if he publicly criticizes him. What a bummer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elinz Posted February 17, 2004 Author Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 But I bet the father is a little more proud of him now than before. Mel used to live the celebrity lifestyle. That had to have been dissapointing for the father despite all his son's fame and fortune. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest curvette Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Originally posted by elinz@Feb 17 2004, 02:06 PM But I bet the father is a little more proud ofhim now than before. Mel used to live thecelebrity lifestyle.That had to have been dissapointing for thefather despite all his son's fame and fortune. Yes, some parents only love their children when they are doing what the parent likes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.