|
I was being really stubborn and had gone a few days without exercising. I see now what many of you (and others elsewhere) are saying. Sorry for going ape-shit and lobbing grenades.
Gibson’s movie is just a film. It is perfectly acceptable to judge it as a film. I perceive the film as ingeniously using slow motion so as to allow one to contemplate, pray and reflect; others simply find the use of slow-motion to be distracting and unnecessary. I mean, who wants to be reminded of the Matrix or Charlie’s Angels while watching a movie about Christ?
The Passion is also a unique film. Some see the film as an overly somber and dire statement of faith that is myopic and selective. Some see the film in a non-religious context but find the film to be meaningful because of its contemplative (or singular) examination of human intolerance, indifference and closed-mindedness. Others view the film as an evangelical tool that is beyond reproach or criticism. At least one NY critic thinks that Mel Gibson made an NC-17 porno with spurting bodily fluids, orgasmic contortions and pounding music that reminds one of hard-core grinding.
It is not a perfect film. Even devout Christians can have a cool reception to the film. I mean, I personally would rather read Luke than watch the Passion for a third time. Gibson left out several important emotions from the Passion. He left out joy, jubilation, celebration, euphoria, and elation. I can see how this would alienate many.
|