(OT) That Mel Gibson Movie

Andrew White wrote:

Antipodean Bucket Farmer wrote:


In article ,
says...

Connie Johnston writes:
| I have two sons (11 + 13). Is this movie appropriate for them?

To me personally, there's no question that this movie is not
appropriate for pre-teens or younger teenagers. It's rated R for
violence alone, which means it's quite violent, and at its heart the
plot is about someone being tortured to death.


It is? Really?

Does that mean that book on which it is based also has
a plot which revolves around someone being tortured to
death?


You mean the adult fairytale called the "Bible"? The worst piece of
fantasy I've ever read: stupid, boring and condescending.

Yeah, like you read it

In article ,
Antipodean Bucket Farmer wrote:

In article ,
says...
Connie Johnston writes:
| I have two sons (11 + 13). Is this movie appropriate for them?

To me personally, there's no question that this movie is not
appropriate for pre-teens or younger teenagers. It's rated R for
violence alone, which means it's quite violent, and at its heart the
plot is about someone being tortured to death.


It is? Really?

Does that mean that book on which it is based also has
a plot which revolves around someone being tortured to
death? And does that somehow relate to all of those
nice, pretty crucifix necklaces? And those stained-
glass windows in churches? And all that other-wise
nice, comfortable, loving religious reassurances? Like
the ones about desperately avoiding our own deserved
torture in a rather disappointing retirement resort
without any air-conditioning?

Oooooh... that would be just soooo negative, and
cynical, and depwessing (sic.)

I suggest making sure that your fragile, little
christian soldiers, I mean children, are sheltered from
all that nasty, upsetting violence and death and stuff.

Whatever you do, don't let them read the original
source material.



The "source material" has lots of stuff that is NOT in the movie.

Since I'm not Christian, I don't have any of the rest of the stuff to
which you refer around, either.

And what is your point here? That Christian families ought to make
their kids watch a movie that, according to the interviews I've seen,
makes grownups sick to their stomachs? I think it MUST be possible to
discuss the passion of Jesus' last days with a child without it being an
R rated display.

meh
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

In article ,
Andrew White wrote:

Antipodean Bucket Farmer wrote:

In article ,
says...
Connie Johnston writes:
| I have two sons (11 + 13). Is this movie appropriate for them?

To me personally, there's no question that this movie is not
appropriate for pre-teens or younger teenagers. It's rated R for
violence alone, which means it's quite violent, and at its heart the
plot is about someone being tortured to death.


It is? Really?

Does that mean that book on which it is based also has
a plot which revolves around someone being tortured to
death?

You mean the adult fairytale called the "Bible"? The worst piece of
fantasy I've ever read: stupid, boring and condescending.

The Bible isn't in the category called "fairytale"; if you do not
believe it is literally true, than you would put it in the category of
"mythology".

And there are portions of it that are magnificent to read.

meh
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

Connie Johnston wrote:

I have two sons (11 + 13). Is this movie appropriate for them?

That depends on their level of maturity. It would seem unlikely that the
violence in the movie, which is neither gratuitous nor without a moral
context, is more excessive then what they have been exposed to before.

After seeing the movie, I now find the claims that this is perhaps the
most violent movie you will ever see to be largely exaggerated. I
personally distinguish between violence that is purely gratuitous (as
found in horror/slasher movies) and that which is contained within a
moral context, with a good point to make.

The most violent movie I have seen to date remains Robocop and The
Passion of the Christ doesn't even come close.

You might also be interested in reading the opinion by Orson Scott Card
at http://www.ornery.org/essays/warwatch/2004-02-29-1.html

Antipodean Bucket Farmer writes:
| In article ,
| says...
| Connie Johnston writes:
| | I have two sons (11 + 13). Is this movie appropriate for them?
|
| To me personally, there's no question that this movie is not
| appropriate for pre-teens or younger teenagers. It's rated R for
| violence alone, which means it's quite violent, and at its heart the
| plot is about someone being tortured to death.
|
|
| It is? Really?
|
| Does that mean that book on which it is based also has
| a plot which revolves around someone being tortured to
| death? And does that somehow relate to all of those
| nice, pretty crucifix necklaces? And those stained-
| glass windows in churches? And all that other-wise
| nice, comfortable, loving religious reassurances? Like
| the ones about desperately avoiding our own deserved
| torture in a rather disappointing retirement resort
| without any air-conditioning?
|
| Oooooh... that would be just soooo negative, and
| cynical, and depwessing (sic.)
|
| I suggest making sure that your fragile, little
| christian soldiers, I mean children, are sheltered from
| all that nasty, upsetting violence and death and stuff.
|
| Whatever you do, don't let them read the original
| source material.

You appear to be making three assumptions here.

First, that my children and I are Christian.
Second, that I believe these images you refer to are entirely
appropriate for children.
And third, that children react to all sorts of media in the same way,
so that a static image in metal a few inches tall has the same impact
as a two-hour long film meant to fill the eyes and ears.

Since none of these assumptions are true, it's rather tough to think
of anything useful to say about your post.

- Cindy Kandolf, mamma to Kenneth (10) and Robert (4)
****** Bærum, Norway
Bilingual Families Web Page:
http://www.nethelp.no/cindy/biling-fam.html

"Connie Johnston" wrote in message
...
I have two sons (11 + 13). Is this movie appropriate for them?

Connie

I think that it will be harder on children than other violent movies because
a large majority of those children believe that Jesus was a real person and
this
movie is not "make believe".

Your 13 year old may be fine now and may totally "lose it" in Sunday school
a few weeks from now. It has the potential of long lasting negative effects.
Children who see violence in real life often suffer emotional trauma. This
is
a movie, but the character is someone that we teach children to pray to
every
night before they go to bed, no Freddie Krueger or a cartoon.
We teach children that Jesus was kind and caring and gentle and forgives us
everything we do wrong.
Now, do we want to take out child to see this same man, God's son, beaten
and tortured
beyond all hope?

Just my take. I have not seen the movie yet and I'm not sure I will.
My hesitation? Look at it on a little more personal level. What if I had
a father that died before I was born and all my life I heard good things
about him
and I had seen pictures of him. He was a famous man and one day
someone made a movie about how brutally my father was murdered. What
benefit could come out of an 11 year old seeing this?

I'm not on the "yes they should see it" or the "hell no" side. I just think
everyone is
talking about the physical violence and forgetting to mention the "true
story aspect"

jo

(Eric) wrote:
After seeing the movie, I now find the claims that this is perhaps the
most violent movie you will ever see to be largely exaggerated.

Roger Ebert gave it 4 stars, and says in his review: "This is the
most violent film I have ever seen."

Steve wrote:

(Eric) wrote:
After seeing the movie, I now find the claims that this is perhaps the
most violent movie you will ever see to be largely exaggerated.

Roger Ebert gave it 4 stars, and says in his review: "This is the
most violent film I have ever seen."

Yep, he did and I find those claims to be largely exaggerated.

Robocop, for example, was far more violent then The Passion of the
Christ.

From what I heard, Kill Bill Vol 1 was far more violent then Pulp
Fiction which I would also claim is more violent then The Passion of the
Christ.

I have two sons (11 + 13). Is this movie appropriate for them?

Perhaps Jesus has an answer for this. He said "Suffer the little
children to come unto me." He didn't say "Let the little children
watch me suffer."

In article m,
"jojo" wrote:

"Connie Johnston" wrote in message
...
I have two sons (11 + 13). Is this movie appropriate for them?

Connie

I think that it will be harder on children than other violent movies because
a large majority of those children believe that Jesus was a real person and
this
movie is not "make believe".

Your 13 year old may be fine now and may totally "lose it" in Sunday school
a few weeks from now. It has the potential of long lasting negative effects.
Children who see violence in real life often suffer emotional trauma. This
is
a movie, but the character is someone that we teach children to pray to
every
night before they go to bed, no Freddie Krueger or a cartoon.
We teach children that Jesus was kind and caring and gentle and forgives us
everything we do wrong.
Now, do we want to take out child to see this same man, God's son, beaten
and tortured
beyond all hope?

Just my take. I have not seen the movie yet and I'm not sure I will.
My hesitation? Look at it on a little more personal level. What if I had
a father that died before I was born and all my life I heard good things
about him
and I had seen pictures of him. He was a famous man and one day
someone made a movie about how brutally my father was murdered. What
benefit could come out of an 11 year old seeing this?

I'm not on the "yes they should see it" or the "hell no" side. I just think
everyone is
talking about the physical violence and forgetting to mention the "true
story aspect"

jo




Jo, I think the "true story aspect" of it is the point. If your
theology puts Jesus' suffering in the center -- that is, if, like
Gibson, you believe that our sins are atoned only through the enormous
suffering the Jesus bore -- then you (and your children) OUGHT to know,
in a real, unsanitized way, just what that suffering was. That,
according to Gibson, is why the film was made -- not for entertainment,
but for religious reasons. It is a message film. If it gives people
nightmares and brings home the message of the suffering he bore for
humanity, that is a good thing -- at least, if you are a Christian for
whom Jesus' suffering is a significant part of your theology.

If I were Christian, and my children were older than about 10, I might
consider seeing the movie, and having them see it, for just that reason.
As I am not, I can see no particular reason to subject myself to
accurate images of a person being tortured and killed. Millions of
people have been tortured and killed throughout human history -- and I'm
not interested in seeing any of them.

meh
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care