Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

[David R.Matusiak <dave AT matusiak.org>]

here is someone who has seen it.  and she has a pretty good opinion, 
too.

http://www.nyunews.com/artsandentertainment/film/6967.html

/drm

On Thursday, March 4, 2004, at 02:29  PM, Shea Tisdale wrote:

> I think it was on slate first, but my favorite review/commentary out 
> of all this is whoever called it The Jesus Chainsaw Massacre.  There 
> must be at least 10 sites now that refer to it by that name.
>
> I think a lot of the hoopla is by people who haven’t seen it or won’t 
> see it but want to have an opinion nonetheless.  Sort of like all 
> those people who protested The Last Temptation of Christ because it 
> was heresy...even though they never saw it to make that determination.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Rua
> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 20041:42 PM
> To: Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/
> Subject: Re: [internetworkers] Bloody Pulpit: a question
>
> Disclaimer: I haven't seen The Passion yet, but have a pretty good 
> idea of what's being highlighted in the press and discussions. I do 
> plan to see it. I've spent several years in a Baptist congregration, 3 
> years of Catholic school, visited backwoods 'charismatic' churches, 
> and wrote an A+ paper refuting five major arguments for the existence 
> of a supreme being.
>
> My comment, is that for someone who's spent a year as part of a 
> Baptist church, the big deal about the gory details comes as 'ho hum'. 
> I've heard a sermon or two, where an hour is devoted to descriptions 
> of the type of whip used, the force necessary to rip skin or drive a 
> nail through the hand, the effects on the muscles of carrying a 
> crucifix of X pounds over Z yards, etc. Perhaps I've had a few twisted 
> preachers, or perhaps that's the norm, I haven't taken a survey. I 
> assume that to appreciate a price paid, it's not unreasonable 
> to occasionally review a detailed accounting of the price, no? 
> However, what intrigues me is the hoopla over the gore for this movie.
>
> It sounds like a graphic depiction of pain and suffering, which 
> there's little doubt went on at some level at the hands of Roman 
> enforcers, upon some 'undesireables'. In movies, I've seen people get 
> ripped in two in Gladiator. I saw Hoffman get his teeth drilled right 
> through the nerve (Is it safe?). I've seen bodies hacked, fed into a 
> meat grinder, burned over a slow fire, tortured, etc. Has no one seen 
> a zombie movie? So, they show Jesus getting some rough treatment. I'm 
> not getting the big deal.
>
> If you don't believe it happened to Jesus, put it in the fantasy 
> category you use for Freddy Krueger, Jason, and Michael Myers. If you 
> think it did happen to Jesus, why be surprised to see it re-enacted? 
> Will it be difficult to watch some scenes? From what I hear, probably 
> yes, but then so were scenes from Dawn of the Dead, the killing in 
> American X, and movies about concentration camps. "Kids", now that's a 
> disturbing movie, focused on events happening today, with a fraction 
> of the discussion Mel's getting. Maybe folks just enjoy debating the 
> JC/SurpremeBeing issues, in any form or forum.
>
> PS- Why does anyone care what Mel's dad thinks? I have relatives that 
> think Jerry Lewis is funny, have been to AP prison, or believe 
> aluminum bats should be in the major leagues. We all have idiocy in 
> our family somewhere.
>
> Don