http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30497 Mel Gibson under attack for Jesus film? Actor-director believes enemies are trying to discredit him -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Posted: January 14, 2003 9:00 p.m. Eastern © 2003 WorldNetDaily.com Actor-director Mel Gibson said tonight he's under attack for making a realistic movie about the suffering, sacrificial death of Jesus. On Fox News Channel's "The O'Reilly Factor," Gibson said a reporter was dispatched by a "reputable" but unnamed publication to "dig up dirt" on him. "Whenever you take up a subject like this it does bring out a lot of enemies," he said. His private life, his banking records, charities he supports, friends, business associates and family members have all undergone scrutiny in this investigation, he said. Asked if he believed there was a direct correlation between this investigation and his work on "The Passion," a film he is making in Aramaic and Latin for authenticity, Gibson said: "I think there is." "I'm a big boy," said Gibson. "I can take care of myself, but when you start messing around with my 85-year-old father, watch out." Even though Gibson was angry about what he considers harassment of his friends and family and prying into his personal life, he said he has already forgiven the reporter and those behind him. "This is a movie about love, faith, hope and forgiveness," Gibson said. "He died for all mankind. He (Jesus) suffered for all of us. It's time to get back to that basic message. The world has gone nuts. We could all use a little more love, faith, hope and forgiveness."
It'd be funny to see a movie with Jesus speaking English, but I don't know if using a couple of dead languages is any better.
i didn't gather from the article that making it in those two languages necessarily meant he wouldn't be making it in english as well
What is it about Christianity that pisses so many people off? Is it the claim that Jesus is God in the flesh? I would like to know.
Its always a touchy subject when somebody portrays Jesus on screen, and to have such a big name actor...just stirs up controversy. I don't think people are mad at Jesus...I think they are mad at "Mel Gibson AS Jesus" or something to that affect. Doesn't bother me as long as the movie hold true to the accounts in the Bible.
I'm not sure Mel Gibson is the ideal person to be discussing love, peace and forgiveness. It's like Steven Segal being a Buddhist lama. Somehow, the images of Payback and the Leathal Weapon series-o-crap don't exactly hearken images of love and brotherhood. Likewise Segal's ass-kicking out-for-vengence mentality does not come close to reflecting the non-violent beliefs of Buddhism.
as a Christian, I can't think of anyone who is "worthy" of the role of Jesus Christ. but since we all fall short, i don't see why mel would be any worse than anyone else.
No question, but if he follows up his portrayal of one of the most peaceful souls to walk the face of the earth with a shoot-em-up action movie, it smacks a bit of hypocracy. Segal's a Buddhist, a religion as close to my heart as Christianity, and I have no problem seeing the hypocracy in his insistance on perpetuating violence in cinema.
People are gonna get really mad if it's a "liberal" portrayal of Jesus. Personally, I am going to enjoy this movie and not worry about every little detail. And if they want a liberal slant then that's their choice (as long as they don't hint that modern Chrisitans are evil or something).
i enjoyed the last temptation of christ...thought it did a fairly good job of showing the dualism of the essence of Christ. i'm hoping for a straightforward approach....here's the story...plain and simple.
Mel, I mean MadMax are you trying to promote your movie on CC.net. I think Gibson will do a great job with this movie. I just have to look at what a great job he did on Braveheart.
Agreed, I don't want any agendas or Oliver Stone style themes or anything. The story is powerful enough by itself.
Why does it matter if Mel Gibson, Steven Seagal, etc. played a violent character in another movie? A <i>character</i> is all it is...
It doesn't matter unless they also wrote and directed the movie and espouse the beliefs of said movie in public. It would be like Barbara Streisand decrying the use of SUV's as contributing to terrorism while owning two of her own if that were true. Oh, wait, it IS true. The point is, if you claim to practice peacefulness and kindness in your everyday life and it is part of your personal ethical and moral code, you have a responsibility to set an example to others for those beliefs. We're all hypocrites in one way or another. It's the nature of being human. I just find it annoying when famous/rich people go on television and tell us all how we SHOULD act and what we SHOULD believe when he doesn't particulary follow that credo himself.
