|
|
 |
|
Getting On : Pop Culture
Gibson's new movie | from Bella - Thursday, February 26, 2004
accessed 2529 times Who will be seeing this? I am curious if any of you will be seeing Gibson's new movie "The Passion of The Christ"?
Is so, why?
If not, why?
Given our upbringing, is this one worth your time? |
|
|
|
|
Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article |  from "Sweet!"
Tuesday, October 05, 2004 - 08:58
(Agree/Disagree?)
Do see South Park "Passion of the Jew."
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | from highonhigh
Saturday, February 28, 2004 - 08:31
 (Agree/Disagree?)
I respect the non christian on this site. Because I belive that if you don't feel your faith than, there is nothing you can do about it, you can't force it. In TF we were thought that we have to belive without feelings. But I have discoverd that that is not true at all. Life it's all about feelings. I can't wait to see the movie, most of all because I am a Christian & support anything that has to do with Christianity.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | |  From The _Beast666
Friday, April 09, 2004, 04:38
(Agree/Disagree?)
As for the real Xtians, those bored-again self-lobotomized bigots, those Mormon babykillers, those Star Warriors of the Slave Morality, televangelist blackshirts, zombie squads of the Blessed Virgin Mary (who hovers in a pink cloud over the Bronx spewing hatred, anathema, roses of vomit on the sexuality of children, pregnant teenagers & queers)...
As for the genuine death-cultists, ritual cannibals, Armageddon-freaks--the Xtian Right--we can only pray that the RAPTURE WILL COME & snatch them all up from behind the steering wheels of their cars, from their lukewarm game shows & chaste beds, take them all up into heaven & let us get on with human life. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | from Nick
Friday, February 27, 2004 - 11:14
(Agree/Disagree?)
I have not seen it yet but my buddies went and saw it yesterday and said it was a well-done flick.
If you can get past the religious part of the movie I hear that Gibson did a terrific job producing the movie and from an artistic and technical point of view it was good.
I think I am gonna see it just out of curiosity.
(reply to this comment)
| from Nick
Friday, February 27, 2004 - 11:11
(Agree/Disagree?)
I have not seen it yet but my buddies went and saw it yesterday and said it was a well-done flick.
If you can get past the religious part of the movie I hear that Gibson did a terrific job producing the movie and from an artistic and technical point of view it was good.
I think I am gonna see it just out of curiosity.
(reply to this comment)
| from cassy
Friday, February 27, 2004 - 09:54
(Agree/Disagree?)
It's old news. Why do I watch to watch someone being put to death. I just think its sadism. I know how he died, I don't think there is a reason to see the film unless you just want to see someone being tortured and in pain. It certainly isn't going to "convert" me to Christianity. They just love to play on that, oh, he suffered so much for you so you have to do give your life to pay him back. It's a guilt trip thing, wonderly used to manipulate people.
(reply to this comment)
| from banal_commentator
Friday, February 27, 2004 - 08:58
(Agree/Disagree?)
Why oh why oh why out of all the movies you could make would you spend time and money and wardrobe on one about Jesus Christ???They're are millions of movies made about him already and not enough about other fascinating characters in history. Why don't they make one about the ancient Greeks, at least kinky sex, and philosophy and pretty clothes would be involved. And really, I doubt this one will be anymore anti-semetic then other christ flicks. I think the Media is blowing this up to be more than it is, making it sound like this is the first time that this subject has ever been touched on. Honestly, old hat.
Speaking of ancient Greeks I am dying to see "Alexander" with Colin Farrell and "Troy" with Brad Pitt; now there's something worth watching.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | From Colin Farrell Fan
Friday, February 27, 2004, 13:49
(Agree/Disagree?)
Yes, I can't wait either! The only thing I worry about is the fact that they cast Angelina Jolie as Colin Farrell's Mother in Alexander. I can't figure how that is going to work out with them being the same age and all. Not only that, they are two of the most beautiful people in movies these days, and it would be so much more fun ;) if they were paired as lovers rather than mother/son...(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | From Vicky
Saturday, June 26, 2004, 23:59
(Agree/Disagree?)
Anyone else disappointed with Brad in the 'warrior' role? I felt he was too much of a pretty boy and while he had bulked up well enough to look good in the outfit, his attempts at sounding fierce just didn't do it for me... I just saw a rather pale imitation of Russel Crowe, which is the inevitable comparison, I guess. He didn't have that rough and ready quality and the presence/charisma that Russell commands in 'Gladiator'.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Baxter
Sunday, June 27, 2004, 13:58
(Agree/Disagree?)
Russel Crowe is credible in the hard man role for a very good reason: He looks like a Rugby player and he likes to brawl. He has that very particular quality usually synonymous with colonial types. A sort of rugged aspect that says he probably does have a fair chance in a fight. Then again, that might have had more to do with Ridley Scott than anything else.
Then again, Achilles is meant to be Dionysian in feature: he is supposed to be half-god. Makes sense that Brad pitt would play him.
I haven't heard a single good word about this film. I must say I'm disappointed with Wolfgang Peterson. Has anyone seen 'Das Boot'? That's what his original work was like. The bigger the budget the worse the director's effort.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Shackled
Sunday, June 27, 2004, 18:06
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm a big fan of the Iliad and was very excited to hear someone was makin a move on the it. But as soon as I heard that Wolfgang Peterson would direct it I knew it wouldn't equal LOTR or Gladiator. I can't believe someone would put that much money into his hands. He did an excellent job of destroying an epic.
As for acting, I thought Eric Bana was the only one that did a good acting job. Brian Cox was alright. Alot of people said Peter O'toole and the scene where he begs Achilles for his son was amazing, but I didn't feel it. Maybe that was because the movie up until then was pathetic. And all the other big name actors proved how limited their talent is.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From Lance
Sunday, June 27, 2004, 19:47
(Agree/Disagree?)
I agree! that movie was a travesty and an insult to a legend. a complete waste of talent and money for the sake of lulling teenage girls and gay men to the site of Brad pitts ass. The rest of the movie completey distroyed the iliad.
I felt as if some random hollywood writer got bored one day and then picked up the cliff notes to the iliad and them began scratching out names and facts; changing normal characters into villians and a ten year war to something like two weeks.
At the risk of sounding like a teenage dork on one of those movie flaming web sites, I'll have to say that this movie preys on yet another character flaw that is the shame of my generation, along with most so called "reality TV shows. Give me a fucking break!(reply to this comment) |
| | From frmrjoyish
Sunday, June 27, 2004, 08:01
(Agree/Disagree?)
I thought "Troy" was the most god-awful movie I've ever seen. It was so stupid that my friend and I were cracking up the entire time despite the dirty looks from other people in the theatre. It was so predictable and cheesy it was pathetic. The eye candy factor was the one plus! I've never been a huge Brad Pitt fan but he was pretty hot in a mini skirt I must say. Eric Bana was fine as hell and saved the whole film from being a complete and total disaster. My girlfriends are gonna get together when it comes out on DVD and do sort of a "Mystery Science Theatre" on it! Can't wait lol!(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Vicky
Sunday, June 27, 2004, 08:16
(Agree/Disagree?)
Oh good, my initial misgivings have been confirmed then - I didn't even bother to watch it after seeing some excerpts. I could tell just from 10 minutes or so of the 'best bits' that it was not gonna be my kind of film. At least now I know not to bother to rent it either.
As far as eye candy is concerned, there is definitely something to be said for the old leather and straps isn't there? Oh well, maybe I should watch it - I'll save it for one of those lonely nights...(reply to this comment) |
| | From frmrjoyish
Sunday, June 27, 2004, 10:14
(Agree/Disagree?)
The unintended comic relief that the movie provided us was well worth the ticket price....ladies, you'll have to pay for this one yourselves as I don't recommend taking your man to this film or you may have to cut down on the gasps and sighs every time a georgeous hunk of semi naked man flesh is paraded across the screen...which is almost the whole movie. The eye candy was enough to send you into carb overload! Very yummy! Don't expect much of an interesting plot and story line, though or you're in for a huge dissapointment. : )(reply to this comment) |
| | from lochnymph
Thursday, February 26, 2004 - 21:36
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm going to go see it. I suport Mel Gibson in this because he put something out there that he knew could cause conterversy, and said to hell with it. It is, like he said, a free country, and he is free to express his art in any way he chooses. I haven't seen it yet, but from what I hear he just showed it the way that the story was told, and for these people that are screaming about it, they sound like a bunch of sorry assed winers.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From Anthony
Friday, February 27, 2004, 15:51
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm not jade, and don't think money-making is a bad thing, all else equal. I want to make movies for a myriad of reason, not the least of which would be to exhibit my wierdness while hiding behind the cowardly "artistic expression," also to be filthy rich and disgustingly famous. After all, since we live on this wretched planet's modern society, why not strive for those things which are most coveted?(reply to this comment) |
| | From Mydestinyismine
Friday, February 27, 2004, 00:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
I don't think he made this film entirely for profit. He funded it himself because he says it was his life long desire. Also, no other producer thought it be a hit or money making. Even when he completed it he had a hard time getting theatres to show it. Only in the last couple weeks, with all the controversy, has it become popular and shownings increased. (reply to this comment) |
| | From Anthony
Friday, February 27, 2004, 14:02
(Agree/Disagree?)
The Usuall Suspects was shopped around to 28 different studios prior to finding a home a putting several actors on the celebrity map. Producers often don't know anything they just have money. And as far as funding it himself, how many people do you know fund personal projrcts they expect to fail? Again my dear child, it's business, and the business of America is business.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | from sailor
Thursday, February 26, 2004 - 19:12
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'll just go and rent the Last Temptation of Christ if I want to see a movie about Jesus.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from frmrjoyish
Thursday, February 26, 2004 - 17:15
(Agree/Disagree?)
I for one won't be seeing it! I really couldn't care less! I don't like gore, guts and violence, and I especially don't like how the religious right is being used to promote this film. I have much better things to waste my time and money on!!
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | from banal_commentator
Thursday, February 26, 2004 - 16:38
(Agree/Disagree?)
I used to be madly inlove with Mel Gibson, till I realised how ultra-conservative he is. His movie "The Patriot" is just chock full of unnecessary pathos as I imagine "Passion" will be. His latest comments regarding this movie were especially banal and really gave a bad impression of Catholics. I for one, will so not watch this movie; I had enough of Christ flicks in the cult and watchign people in rags and sick with Leprosy or being crucified has always depressed me. I don't know, call me crazy.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from Albatross
Thursday, February 26, 2004 - 16:30
(Agree/Disagree?)
Sorry Folks....I had to do it, mostly for the WTF? factor. Here is what TF has to say: (Note...i especially enjoyed where it's signed : passionately, Jesus.
Tracts: My Passion
Mel Gibson’s film, The Passion of the Christ, has caused a stir and raised controversy.
Instead of trying to discern what the director is trying to say, ask yourself this: “How does this movie affect me? What does it mean to me? Does it mean I should change something in my life? Where do I go from here?” If you let this film inspire you to be a better person and to live the way I want you to live, then you’ll come out ahead.
Yes, this is Jesus, and I'm speaking directly to you. And yes, I am alive, well, and very active today. 1 I’ll speak to anyone who will listen. If you want to know more about My passion, read on.
The central focus of the film is My suffering and death—the intense, brutal, gruesome torture I endured when I was on Earth 2,000 years ago.
I endured all this for you, because of My love for you. There had to be a punishment for your sins, so in dying this horrible death I took your punishment. I died for you, so that you could be forgiven, cleansed, and be together with Me forever. I gave Myself for you, so that you could be happy and fulfilled in this life, and someday join Me in Paradise for all eternity.
Why?—Because I was driven by love to save you, to pay the price for your salvation. My love for you, just you, the one who is reading this piece of paper, is that great. If you were the only person in the whole world, I would have still died for you. I want you to be happy for eternity. You are My passion.2
Life is all about choices, and I made many choices that led Me to the cross. I could have backed out many times, and I had ample opportunity to do so. I didn’t have to keep silent when I was brought before Pilate, I could have defended Myself, but I didn’t. I died to save you and I have never regretted that decision.
While My last hours on Earth represent a part of the passion I have for you, it didn’t stop there. My passion has been thriving for 2,000 years.
I want you to focus on My love for you right now— today . My love for you is true and lasting. It can never be dissuaded; it cannot be quenched. It never loses hope, and it knows no limits. My love for you is complete. My passion for you is real, and I want it to be a part of your everyday life.
I gave My life for you, and now I have more—so much more—to give you. I want to fill you with the totality of My love, if you will receive it.
I know everything about you, including your flaws and mistakes, and I still love you. I love you intensely and passionately, now and forever. I love you as a father loves his child, and as a husband loves his wife.
My love is forgiving, it is merciful, and it is constant. I care about you, and I want to be involved in every aspect of your life.
Others will fail you, but I will never fail you: I'll always be here for you. I want to help you, guide you, comfort you, and care for you. Our love can grow deeper every day.
Even if you don't understand everything about the sacrifice I made for you—why I had to give My life and why it had to happen the way it did—if you will open your heart and accept My love for you, then you’ll know that My love is real, and in time you'll understand more.
I appreciate your remembrance of My death, and now I want you to move forward and keep on experiencing My passion. By knowing Me personally, you allow My passion to become a part of your life, to fill you and complete you.
If you don't know Me yet, you can get to know Me right now. Just open your heart to Me. You can begin by saying this simple prayer:
Dear Jesus, thank You for giving Your life for me. Please forgive me for the wrong things I've done. I don't understand everything about Your passionate love, but I want to know You. I ask You to please come into my heart, give me Your free gift of eternal life, and teach me more about Your love. Amen.
If you already know Me, get to know Me better. Work on our relationship. Open your life more to Me. Now that we’re connected, please do not neglect Me.
Read My messages to you in the Bible, and try to apply them to your life. If you read the account of My life and the words I said as recorded in the Gospel of John, and the other Gospels, you’ll understand more about My great love and passion.
I know it’s difficult in this fast-paced world, but if you’ll make the effort to take time daily to get alone and quiet so you can talk to Me and let Me speak to you, it will make a difference in your life. You can talk to Me anywhere, any time, out loud or in your heart—any way you like! Tell Me all that is on your mind. I'll communicate with you through an impression, a thought, a whisper to your heart. Open your mind and heart to Me and you’ll come to know the depths of My love.
The cross is empty now. I live, and I long to give you a happier life, filled with true love, with good things. I want to teach you about My deep, eternal, passionate love and to help you share that same passion with others. It will change their lives too.
My commission to those who love Me is this: Love Me first with all your heart, mind and soul, and then love others.3
Do the things I ask of you, and I promise that your life will overflow with joy, your satisfaction will know no bounds, and your happiness will know no equal. You’ll not only receive forgiveness for your sins, but you’ll find true freedom, peace of mind, joy, happiness, and above all, true love—now and forever.
Passionately,
Jesus
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | From Benz
Thursday, February 26, 2004, 18:15
(Agree/Disagree?)
I’ve heard “TF” is going crazy for this film.
My dad apparently went to the premiere here with other Zerbiods
I wonder, since “TF” is so big on Jesus's suffering paying for sins, maybe they think the pain & suffering they inflicted on their kids might be paying for their sins as well??
– It actually makes sense when you consider they were so big on us “being exactly like Jesus”. – When we got sick as kids, weren’t our parents actually the ones being punished by “the lord”, our poor, poor, poor parents.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | from Anthony
Thursday, February 26, 2004 - 16:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
Dan & I were talking about seeing it... want to join us?
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | From afflick
Thursday, February 26, 2004, 18:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
This movie is not so much about Gibson's "love for Christ" and more about boxoffice buzz. In many places, love it or hate it, the movie is sold out hours before it began. Brilliant marketing plan, Mel. I am not going to see this movie--ever. It falls under the "What's the Point?" category along with anything by Britney Spears or Julia Roberts. However, the movie's treatment of the Jews deserves some attention. The Israelites are projected as "Christ killers," evil, wicked people (from what I have gathered from articles written concerning the movie) which sparks hate even two thousand years later. I wonder if any devout Christians who see this movie will notice the intense slant of hatred for Jews that is peppered throughout? Will they even find this ironic in a movie about "The Man of Love?" Probably not.(reply to this comment) |
| | From roughneck
Friday, February 27, 2004, 01:51
(Agree/Disagree?)
I won't be seeing this movie either, for similar reasons and more. But you're absolutely right: There really is no fucking point: it's not as if it's even a brand new story or anything. From what I've seen and read, it's basically a feature length snuff film, designed to "shock and awe" the viewer. I, for one don't need or want to see a first century roman torture and execution displayed realistically in technicolor on a 50 foot screen. Or any screen for that matter.
Related topic: I saw on the news the other day that people were bringing kids as young as 8 to see this movie. Why anyone would want to take their minor child to watch a feature length movie featuring realistic flagellation, crucifixion and impalement frankly boggles my mind. Anyone else think that deliberately exposing a young child to exceptionally graphic violence like this is irresponsible and harmful? This isn't your run-of-the-mill Ben-Hur or Jesus of Nazareth (or even Last Temptation of Christ) violence either - by his own admission, Mel Gibson wanted to make this movie just as groundbreakingly gory and shockingly brutal as could possibly be. What does it say about the mindset of people who FREAK at the sight of a bare nipple, yet have no qualms about exposing their kids to flesh being whipped from bodies, nails pounded into hands, et fucking cetera? Wow, score one for asshat Christian Conservatives and their "Family Values".
As far as biblically sanctioned anti-semitism is concerned, I for one have serious doubts about the veracity of these events as depicted in the Bible. I have to wonder, why would "the Jews" want one of their own rabbis to be executed by the romans?-Particularly in a way that was against Jewish Law? I don't know what Judea was like 2000 years ago, but if the attitude of the Jewish community now is anything similar to the way it was back then, I think that NO Jew circa AD 30 wanted to see another Jew, for ANY reason to be executed by the hated romans. This was not a peaceful occupation of Palestine, don't forget. A Jew's first loyalty would always have been to his own people first and foremost. Just about all Jews would have automatically sympathised with any roman-executed Jew, no matter the crime. Oh, and if "the Jews" weren't "allowed" to take the law into their own hands and execute by stoning, then how did they get away with it with St. Stephen just a few short months later? Continuity cop anyone? If the Sanhedrin had such a problem with Jesus blaspheming, why didn't they just drag him out and stone him too?
Seems more likely to me that the romans would have been quite happy to crucify a self-proclaimed "king" on their own account, with no rabble rousing by "the Jews" necessary. Ancient Rome had a well documented record of horribly executing anyone and everyone who defied Imperium Romanum. - Read "Spartacus" for just one set of examples. Also, I don't think that the sign "this is the king of the Jews" being posted on the cross would have had anything to do with Pilate mocking the Sanhedrin, it would have been to tell all onlookers that "This is How Rome Deals With so-called Kings". I think that at least this scenario looks congruent with the rest of Roman history as I understand it.
I suspect that this may be one place where "scripture" may have been rewritten long ago to paint the romans in a better light than "the Jews". Maybe it was somewhat easier on someone's gentile, apologist, roman catholic conscience to be able to say "the Jews delivered him up". Of course, I also think that most of the Bible can be quite safely called "historical fiction". But that's another rant. :)
(reply to this comment) |
| | From dan
Sunday, June 27, 2004, 08:48
(Agree/Disagree?)
you find your self in the tricky busness of converting a dangerous cult to do what you want it to do. what do you do? the romans wre waching their empire crumble from the inside and someone had the great idea to instead of fighting these fanatics, turn them to our side. so the went about saying "once you was a pagan now you is a holy roman"
the only snag was a couple hundred years ago you may have inadvertantly crusified their god.... fuck..that is just the kinda shit to bringa man down. let s not forget though that we are not dealing with men.. we're dealing with politicans. so the grand idea cae up that we didn't want to kill him. no , t was thse pesky jewish fucks that we owe money to. those basterds made us do it.
pilot, gentel soul that he was didn't crucify hundreds at a time and get brought in at the end of a disaster called a career with one order: clean that place up however ou have to or don't bother coming home. so this kind and gentel man (with a lovley wife who may have been a secret christian before there were any) got conned into killing the only son of zues... i mean jahova. and it all was the fault of those nasty men that we conveniantly slautered soon there after.
the winers write the history. winers aren't about to start telling the trueth about wars and gods they may have killed. the bible was first put together 300 years after christ. that is a long time to fix the details. render un to ceaser has suspitious tint to it coming fro a jew. ya lets all pay this occupying fore so they can afford to hunt and kill us with great effect.
to me, it is not too far a leap to think that the romans, expert conquers ad collinists that they were, knew a dangerous thing when they saw it. nothing is more dangerous than a man that gives a beaten and discouraged buch of desert sheep herders hope. hope is all it takes to run screaming into spear. we fear suicide bombers to day. why would the roan soldier fear a fearles beserker with allah on his mind and hope in his heart.
from that view the con was writen to controll a huge urban population that had out grown its self. they no longer were satisfied by what was once used, gladiators, bread and blood. so they were given the opiat and setteled down to a quite kind of stuper known as the dark ages.
this is not a history lecture so sorry. as for the movie.... ya it is the way the story told it. do you real believe everything the white house puts out? or rumsfeld for that matter? evil people and their axis are out there waiting to get you so take this plastic and tape andput it over your windows. this will protect you from the aliens who are definetly foreign and need to be monitered by new bigger and better gov agency.
and that is about as nicly as i can put it with out a beer in me and a crowd to shout at. as for the spelling?? fucking sue me. (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From Joe H
Wednesday, April 07, 2004, 15:11
(Agree/Disagree?)
My sentiments exactly, Roughneck. The fact is that Christianity is a morbid, fucked-up religion. Mel Gibson wants you to feel guilty - like your sins caused Jesus' suffering - that's what this is all about. Emotional blackmail. Well fuck that! If Jesus wanted me to love and serve him, all he had to do was come down and talk to me and maybe buy me a beer. Instead, he created a whole morbid mind-fucking religion that has eaten so many brains it ought to be classified as a neurological virus. Thanks a lot Jesus! Your death sure helped things!(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From I Agree
Wednesday, April 07, 2004, 15:22
(Agree/Disagree?)
So if I go talk with you and buy you a beer will you love and serve me? You're easy -- and cheap!
Seriously now, notice that Zerby seems to subscribe to a scheme like the one you ascribe to Gibson? I have the urge to do a word change on your paragraph:
"[Karen Zerby] wants you to feel guilty - like your sins cause [her] suffering [and her supposed life of sacrifice and supposed dedication to "her flock"] - that's what this is all about. Emotional blackmail. Well fuck that! ... [She] created [or Berg created, she perpetuates] a whole morbid mind-fucking religion that has eaten so many brains it ought to be classified as a neurological virus."(reply to this comment) |
| | From Joe H
Thursday, April 08, 2004, 20:16
(Agree/Disagree?)
I may be a male slut, but you've completely missed my point. I want Jesus, if he exists, to relate to ME personally. I don't give a shit if the rest of you think he died for your sins. When he strikes me down on the road to Damascus (a small town about 10 minutes from where my parents live) and says "Joe, Joe, why persecutest thou me?" then I'll serve him, but no amount of Christian propaganda is going to get me to accept him on blind faith.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Joe H
Thursday, February 26, 2004, 18:31
(Agree/Disagree?)
To me, it seems a little stupid to come away from either reading the gospels or watching this movie with anti-semitic sentiments. After all, what nationality was Jesus? Of course, Christians believe that Jesus was the son of God, so his "human race" is irrelevant, but doesn't it say something that God chose the Jewish race for his son? And what was the race of the Virgin Mary? How about his disciples? How about St. Peter, St. Paul, Nicodemus, Mary Magdalene, and so on? The whole thing is just fucking retarded, but then, what can you expect from Christians? (reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From Jana
Monday, July 25, 2005, 07:58
(Agree/Disagree?)
While I haven't been thinking about anything to do with Christianity in awhile, since any mention of the "Bible" or "Jesus" automatically conjures up memories in my mind of my time as a "dedicated disciple for the Lord", this movie kinda did have an effect on me. As in, reminding me there IS indeed a God somewhere... and I believe that He has a plan for us all. The thing that really bothered me about TF is that they think that God and the TF go hand in hand. Which is chicken shite in my opinion, because you can be a Christian, you can pray, heck, you can even read your fucking Bible, but that doesn't mean you have to be like Them. I think TF has turned alot of us off from Christianity in general, because you can't hear the name of Jesus without shuddering, and remembering those sick "Loving Jesus" activities we'd do in the livingroom. TF has done their best to explain Jesus and Christianity in general, going so far as to add their own stupid theories on the spirit world and all...
Did you know that conspiracy theorists say that Jesus didn't actually die, but secretly escaped, married Mary Magdalene and had three daughters and two sons (or was it the other way around...?) TF is gonna have a heyday explaining that one away... LOL! "O ye of little faith" MY ARSE! (reply to this comment) |
| |
|
|
|
|
(
]
[About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]