The Passion (Mel Gibson)

Okay, here's a weird tidbit I just read about this film. (I've already read some of the hype.) This is from an AP story.

"The movie, directed by Gibson, stars James Caviezel as Christ during the last 12 hours of his life and Monica Belluci as Mary Magdalene. The reported $25 million production will feature dialogue only in Latin and Aramaic with no English subtitles."

Whaa? Did I read that right? Dialogue in Latin and Aramaic? No English subtitles?

I adore Mel Gibson and admire the fact that he doesn't live the Hollywood lifestyle and yet is so successful (anyone who smells conservative often gets a bum's rap in Hollywood) ... but this is a tad over the top.

Or am I missing something?

Linda
(a.k.a. Lindum Austruckium)

__________________
Linda's Author Website
Linda's Amazon Author page

Nope, you read that right.

In fact, the movie has pretty much completed shooting at this point. I believe they're in post production.

the thought is that since the story is so well known, you won't need to understand what is being literally said. I'm sure the DVD will have subtitles though...

__________________
-haf

Check out the movie sequel database!

>>>smile, smile big!<<<

My independent film company

I sure as heck hope so (that it has subtitles), i am looking forward to seeing this flick, i heard it is suppose to be really good.

__________________
Seek me, for comfort, call me, for Solace, I'll be waiting, for the end of my broken heart..

Plus a lady fan of PimpDaShizzle V2.0 and Most importantly JRS

I'm seeing this one just for Monica Bellucci i am hoping there won't be TOO many spirtual events but I have to expect that in a Jesus movie, unless they do it with a more historical sense

__________________
Boards don't hit back

So, let me get this straight: you're going to see a movie about Jesus Christ, but you're hoping they'll cut the spirituality short in favor of extensive nudity.

You, um, might wanna rethink your decision to see this film.


Eh?

Anyone hear about Gibson's remaining steadfast in having the jews be responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus?


What historical but non-spiritual sense is there?
I mean, the story of Jesus really isn't all that fascinating if you cut out all the God and rising from the dead stuff.

But yeah, seeing Monica Bellucci naked would be cool.

__________________
"We are all worms, but I do believe I am a glow-worm."
--Winston Churchill

1st. I never said anything about nudity...i just like Monica Bellucci, didn't think she came packaged with nudity for every movie

2nd. Historically speaking i mean, I mean they just show Jesus' life without constantly bombarding you with the idea that he is the son of god etc. I was just offering that as an alternative idea it wasn't as if i was suggesting that they would do that. I was just saying i would probably enjoy it more if they did that.

The life of Jesus without the God stuff being shoved in your face could be interesting though. It could follow him teaching his ideas, the stories, his healing,gathering followers, his betrayal, crucifixtion and the apostles could recieve visions or dreams of him. That could be an example of an approach taken.

But all of his (Jesus's) teachings, and other forementioned...come from God...What's the first thing that comes to mind when you think of Jesus??? He is the Son of God and He was crucifed...to teach us a lesson...by God. I don't want to get all religious on this...b/c everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and opinions...but I understand what you are saying. The story just would seem right without mentioning God...and If i am not mistaken...God sent Jesus in the image of himself...just a though.

If you want to see her naked, watch Irreversible, or one of her other films. She doesn't need to be nude in a movie about Jesus.

__________________
"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore!" - Howard Beale

Here are some photos from the movie (which is supposed to be ultra-violent, in characteristic Mel Gibson fashion):

Attachments

 

And another one:

Attachments

 

Why wouldn't it have subtitles though? (I mean it is a little silly. While it's wonderful to do this film as accurate as possible, very very very few people speak Latin well enough to understand a whole movie). Oh well.

Nice pics.

I heard it's suppose to be a little graphic...I hope they do have subtitles for...the only other language other that english that i speak is spanish...

I guess he is doing it to be unique and also to make the viewer think? I doubt there will be long conversations and the audience should be able to determine the dialogues through the context of their lines

AHEM
Anyone hear about Gibson's remaining steadfast in having the jews be responsible for the crucifixion of Jesus?

Anyone?

I'm pretty sure he's going to remain as faithful to the original text (The New Testament of the Bible) and in that, the Jews are, in one way or another, responsible for Christ's death.

Gibson's crew has stated that the film will not be anti-jewish, if thats what you were looking for.

Well, the movie deals with the final 12 hours of Jesus' life, so I don't really think that there will be much in the way of plot or narrative complexity. Basically, the way I see it, the movie is designed to be a spectacle, presumably to represent, as accurately as possible (from Mel Gibson's directorial perspective), the passion of Christ. I think his decision to retain the original languages and eliminate subtitles is interesting, from an experimental point of view. Let's see how it turns out! I think the movie would be unique in representing a moment in history (arguably the turning point of history) with an attempt at literal authenticity (again, arguable).

Actually, I believe, the movie is based on a book entitled "The Dolorous Passion of Our Lord Jesus Christ" and not directly on the gospels.

Shut up.

I am sorry. I don't know why that struck me as funny but it did...