What Did You Think Of The Violence?

[L5]

One of my agnostic friends said that he thinks that what Christ went through on screen had to be a stretch beyond what actually happened. I think Mel said once that he actually toned it down from what actually happened.

[CatholicAndFanatical]

I chose that it was pretty accurate.

The roman soldiers were harsh people, brutal in nature. I would even venture to say it might have been worse than portrayed on screen.

Too many people complain about the violence.

I say its hogwash. Where were these people when "Natural Born Killers" was playing, or "Saving Private Ryan" which showed people getting their bodies blown to bits and people crawling around the battlefield with half their bodies missing.

[Mary's Knight, La]

from what someone said... if you were really there you probably could have seen some internal organs and presumably identified them as such... i've heard passion talks that describe it as being much worse than what was portrayed but seeing what was shown was touching enough

[Iacobus]

The reason this movie is rising all the questions about the violence is becasue it focus on Jesus. We are missing the point of the film by looking at the violence the way we are. Read my post http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?s...=0entry127661 . It was an article in the Chicago Trib that a Preist recommanded to me. It is vey well writen, easy to read, and short. Check it out.

[rachael]

i think that it was gory, but i also think that it helps get the point across better

[Oik]

I really am unable to explain the movie except to say that it is a work of art.

The violence issue was super-hyped. Intially I wasn't considering it, but as time passed and everybody talked of how "brutal" "gory" violent" and "intense" the movie was, I became more anxious and nervous, not knowing what to expect.

I saw this work of art and actually was a little surprised. I had anticipated far worse than I seen.

I believe that all the posts made before my posts make great points and give good insights about this.

Edited February 27, 2004 by Oik

[Archangel]

I was expecting to see huge chunks of flesh ripped off of Christ's body and His exposed bones.

I think "Saving Private Ryan" had more gore (e.g. soldier holding his severed arm) and violence (e.g. soldier being slowly stabbed in the chest) than "The Passion of the Christ."

[willguy]

I think the violence was neccesary. Too often we see a clean Jesus. Scourging was not clean. Crucifixion was not clean. It was bloody. Very, very bloody.

[Rebirth flame]

i'd have to say the violence was somewhere between accurate and toned down. I have seen quite a few crucifixion presentations, and from what i observed, they could have made it much more violent. I think, however, that to see and almost "experience" the pain He went through to free us all from the chains of sin was a good way to learn what i could be doing better to say that i'm sorry for ever having put him through that. It was a great eye opener for some.

[Thomas]

I was expecting to see huge chunks of flesh ripped off of Christ's body and His exposed bones.

I think "Saving Private Ryan" had more gore (e.g. soldier holding his severed arm) and violence (e.g. soldier being slowly stabbed in the chest) than "The Passion of the Christ."

I saw it this morning and I'm blown away, but I'd just like to comment on this quote.

During the flogging at the pillar, there was huge chunks of skin ripped off and you could in fact see three of his ribs.

I may well have misinterpreted your post....sorry if I did.

-Thomas

[Oik]

I have seen the movie twice.

The first time i wasn't able to see so many of the subties.

Yes, you do see all that you said. I believe that the violence was toned down, but really pointed to a greater reality, as does the whole movie.

[Matty_boy]

Have any of you ever read Ann Katherine Emmerich's book "The Passion of Christ"? You need to go buy this book. It's even more gruesome than the movie. Anne Katherine Emmerich was a visionary who "saw" or envisioned the entire thing. You really need to read this book.

[Jake Huether]

Have any of you ever read Ann Katherine Emmerich's book "The Passion of Christ"? You need to go buy this book. It's even more gruesome than the movie. Anne Katherine Emmerich was a visionary who "saw" or envisioned the entire thing. You really need to read this book.

Ditto.

Go to the "reading room". It's there in PDF for FREE! You have no excuse. Read it.

I am so glad dUSt had us read it before the movie. It made the movie much more clear.

By the way. It WAS toned down.

It could have been much WORSE, and yet it could NEVER depict what happened.

I'd also like to point out that those critics who are all caught up on the violence are missing the entire movie. They are blind. The violence is only superficial. The "spirit" of the movie (if it can be called that) is so much more. It's LOVE. It's sacrifice. It's mercy.

There is something more than just the film strip and light that projects the movie to you. There are prayers behind it. There is grace and spirit. I saw it for the second time, and to my surprise, I came away the same as the first time, if not even MORE touched.

[cmotherofpirl]

Emmerich's book is a dictated private revelation and is not a gospel account.

[Jake Huether]

Thanks for pointing that out.

The book itself also makes this point.