That's entertainment

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Mon Feb 23, 2004 6:53 pm

Mary Sanchez at Poynter, like many people in the newspaper business, is all worked up over "The Passion of the Christ." We seem to have lost sight of the fact that it's a goddamn movie. The brouhaha is no less stupid than the approach taken to the recent movie "Shattered Glass," which was to take a movie seriously.

paulwiggins · **Posted:** Mon Feb 23, 2004 8:02 pm

That is the most balanced remark I have read on this matter. And while we are on the subject: if I see one more reference to someone surviving an audition I shall nip outside to continue slow suicide by nicotine.[ February 23, 2004: Message edited by: Paul Wiggins ]

mcarlson · **Posted:** Mon Feb 23, 2004 8:29 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
[QB]Mary Sanchez at Poynter, like many people in the newspaper business, is all worked up over "The Passion of the Christ." We seem to have lost sight of the fact that it's a goddamn movie. QB]<hr></blockquote>Well, we gotta help Mel Gibson get back the $25 million or so he's spent on this filmed expression of his religious convictions.[ February 23, 2004: Message edited by: Walter ]

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Mon Feb 23, 2004 8:47 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by Walter:
Well, we gotta help Mel Gibson get back the $25 million or so he's spent on this filmed expression of his medieval brand of Catholicism.<hr></blockquote>Gibson is a moviemaker who has nicely played the publicity machine. His brand of Catholicism is of no concern.

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Mon Feb 23, 2004 9:30 pm

This has taken shameless marketing to new heights. My hunch is that most people saw through it all long ago and will take a pass on the film. Give the little guy credit for trying.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:02 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by jjmoney62:
This has taken shameless marketing to new heights. My hunch is that most people saw through it all long ago and will take a pass on the film. Give the little guy credit for trying.<hr></blockquote>Who knows? It might be a good movie. But asking a theologian to comment on it is like asking a physicist to comment on "Star Wars."

mcarlson · **Posted:** Mon Feb 23, 2004 10:51 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by blanp:
His brand of Catholicism is of no concern.<hr></blockquote>Assuming you mean to say you don't give two shits about Gibson's religious convictions, I agree.But they appear to be central to the picture, on which I'll withhold judgment until I get around to seeing it.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 4:29 pm

History is also treated selectively. The writer Jon Meacham, in a patient and thorough article in Newsweek, has detailed the many small ways that Gibson disregarded what historians know of the period, with the effect of assigning greater responsibility to the Jews, and less to the Romans, for Jesusâ€™ death. (David Denby, in the New Yorker.)***A moviemaker disregarded history? Wow.***

majorbabs · **Posted:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 5:09 pm

In my bastion of conservatism, there's talk of several churches buying up all the movie tickets so that those uneducated in church doctrine won't be able to see it.And you wonder why I'm desparate to leave the Midwest for anywhere but California...

ADKbrown · **Posted:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 5:42 pm

<blockquote>quote:<hr>Originally posted by majorbabs:
In my bastion of conservatism, there's talk of several churches buying up all the movie tickets so that those uneducated in church doctrine won't be able to see it.And you wonder why I'm desparate to leave the Midwest for anywhere but California...<hr></blockquote>I thought the churches were thrilled that a movie about Christ is getting so much attention.

majorbabs · **Posted:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 6:07 pm

Not if it doesn't present the information in the way the churches want it presented. And I gather Mr. Gibson is not.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 6:08 pm

In many areas, including Washington, church groups are buying tickets so the faithful can see it.

paulwiggins · **Posted:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 6:49 pm

Newsroom banter: ''Anyone seen the photo of Mel with Jesus?''

majorbabs · **Posted:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 8:36 pm

And the answer is, "Christ, I can't keep track of it." ?

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:55 pm

Anyway, this is a film review, not Sunday school. The paradox of wishing something horrible to stop even as you want it to continue has as much to do with moviegoing as with theology. And Mr. Gibson, either guilelessly or ingeniously, has exploited the popular appetite for terror and gore for what he and his allies see as a higher end. The means, however, are no different from those used by virtuosos of shock cinema like Quentin Tarantino and Gaspar NoÃ©, who subjected Ms. [Monica] Bellucci to such grievous indignity in "IrrÃ©versible." Mr. Gibson is temperamentally a more stolid, less formally adventurous filmmaker, but he is no less a connoisseur of violence, and it will be amusing to see some of the same scolds who condemned Mr. Tarantino's "Kill Bill: Vol. 1" sing the praises of "The Passion of the Christ." (A.O. Scott, who seems to be closer to the right track.)[ February 24, 2004: Message edited by: blanp ]

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2004 8:00 am

Newsday marshaled all the forces of its dynamic new design to wildly overplay the movie opening.

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2004 10:27 am

MEL: Well, I guess it's over. The movie finally came out, the reviews are in, Newsday proved that tens if not dozens of ... people went to see it.AGENT (of undetermined ethnicity/religion): How great was it to have that lady drop dead?MEL: Yeah, nice "Exorcist" touch, eh? But, oh well, I guess it's all over.AGENT: Not so fast, Mel.MEL: What do you mean. How could we possibly milk the crucifixion of Christ for any more money?AGENT: I got this story in the New York Times today: "Mel Gibson's provocative new film, "The Passion of the Christ," is making some of Hollywood's most prominent executives uncomfortable in ways that may damage Mr. Gibson's career."MEL: Wow. They fell for that one?AGENT: What can i say? I'm good. MEL: Does this mean I'll have to have a public breakdown of some sort and do a rehab stint this spring?AGENT: Well, after this Sunday's Oscar telecast, I'll be strongly advising it. MEL: Why? What's going to happen?AGENT: Two words: wardrobe malfunction.MEL: Jesus Christ ........

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Thu Feb 26, 2004 10:29 am

i read her so you don't have to. the Maureen Dowd computer program goes haywire:Stations of the Crass
By MAUREEN DOWD

Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.Mel Gibson and George W. Bush are courting bigotry in the name of sanctity.The moviemaker wants to promote "The Passion of the Christ" and the president wants to prevent the passion of the gays.Opening on two screens: W.'s stigmatizing as political strategy and Mel's stigmata as marketing strategy.Mr. Gibson, who told Diane Sawyer that he was inspired to make the movie after suffering through addictions, found the ultimate 12-step program: the Stations of the Cross.....Perhaps fittingly for a production that licensed a jeweler to sell $12.99 nail necklaces (what's next? crown-of-thorns prom tiaras?), "The Passion" has the cartoonish violence of a Sergio Leone Western. You might even call it a spaghetti crucifixion, "A Fistful of Nails."

Testy Copy Editors

That's entertainment

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links