Always look on the bright side of life…

Have I ever mentioned how much I love Monty Python?

Spurred by the recent success of Mel Gibson’s “The Passion of the Christ”, the Python boys have decided to celebrate the 25th anniversary of one of their films by re-releasing it to the theaters.

Which film?

“The Life of Brian”, of course!

The Biblical satire will be re-released in Los Angeles, New York and other US cities to mark its 25th anniversary.

Adverts will challenge Mel Gibson’s blockbuster with the lines “Mel or Monty?”, “The Passion or the Python?”

Distributor Rainbow said it hoped the film would “serve as an antidote to all the hysteria about Mel’s movie”.

If it hits Seattle, I’m so there.

(via Kirsten)

iTunes: “Ich Bin von Kopf bis Fuss auf Liebe Eingestellt (“Falling in Love Again”)” by Burroughs, William S. from the album Dead City Radio (1990, 2:28).

Kevin Smith on ‘The Passion’

CURTIS You made a controversial movie about Catholicism, “Dogma.” What did you think about “The Passion of the Christ”?

SMITH I haven’t seen it yet. I think it’s funny, though, that people bring it up and ask me, “What do you think of the controversy?” I’m like, “What controversy?” The dude made a movie about Jesus in a country that’s largely Christian — a very traditional movie — and it’s made over \$200 million in two weeks. There ain’t no controversy, people. That’s a hit. They took one or two Jewish leaders in the beginning and said, “This may be construed as anti-Semitic,” and then spun it into a must-see movie for hard-core Christians. You’ve got to go see it if you love Jesus. I wish to God I had thought to do that when I was making “Dogma.”

From a recent New York Times article promoting Jersey Girl.

The Passion

The more I read about Mel Gibson’s “The Passion“, the less interested I am in seeing two hours of one man being brutally tortured to death.

However, I did love Satapher’s take on the controversy in a MeFi thread…

Wasn’t it the destiny of Jesus to die for the sins of the world? so that we might be saved?

Shouldnt this movie spark pro-semitism!? Someody had to kill the bastard — somebody had to save your soul! THANK GOD THE JEWS KILLED JESUS AND SAVED OUR SOULS.

GOD DAMN.

Okay, maybe it’s a bit wrong. But it’s really funny.

To me.

iTunes: “Wreath of Barbs (Neuroticfish 2)” by :Wumpscut: from the album Wreath of Barbs (Disc 1 – Classic Remixes) (2002, 5:11).

More on Gibson's 'The Passion'

Dad sent me a couple articles over the last few days looking at Mel Gibson’s “The Passion“, lately seeming to be the most controversial religious film that almost no one’s seen since Dogma was in pre-release. Anyway, if you’re at all interested in the film or the controversy around it, both of these are worth a look.

‘You Can’t Whitewash the Events of the Bible’: New Testament scholar Darrell Bock recently spoke with Beliefnet about Mel Gibson’s film “The Passion,” which dramatizes the last hours of Jesus. Critics–including Catholic biblical scholars and the Anti-Defamation League–have raised concerns about the movie’s historicity and its portrayal of Jewish authorities. Bock saw a rough cut of the film in late August.

What Mel Missed: Most of us have yet to see Mel Gibson’s “The Passion,” but we’ve gained one sure impression: it’s bloody. “I wanted to bring you there,” Gibson told Peter J. Boyer in September 15’s New Yorker magazine. “I wanted to be true to the Gospels. That has never been done before.”

The Passion

Dad sent me a link a few minutes ago to this story on BeliefNet about a new film from Mel Gibson depicting the last days of Christ, which looks to be causing a bit of controversy.

But then, don’t all films about Christ cause controversy — especially before they’re released, when nobody can actually make an informed decision about any aspect of the film? Ugh. But anyway. The uproar at this point seems to be that Gibson has endeavored to create a brutally accurate depiction of the beatings and torture that Jesus went through.

Gibson, who has not yet found a studio to release the film, is a devout Catholic and was determined to show fully the torture and painful death of Jesus.

The creator of the bloody film about William Wallace, Braveheart, has not scrimped on the gore: scene after scene in the trailer, on numerous movie websites, feature a battered and bruised Jesus staggering through the streets of Jerusalem covered in blood.

The film, which cost 15 million pounds and is solely in Aramaic and Latin, has caused controversy in the US, even before a single image has been released.

First off — the film is “solely in Aramaic and Latin”? Wow. That, in itself, is pretty impressive.

The trailer itself (which I’ve mirrored on djwudi.com) looks quite interesting — and not nearly worth the controversy that it’s generating, given the subject matter at hand. I find it amazing and somewhat ridiculous that movie after movie comes out with incredible amounts of blood and gore, with nary a comment (Gibson’s own Braveheart won a multitude of awards, and it had some of the most violent battles I’d seen on screen), yet when someone dares to show the crucifixion without prettying it up, people get all up in arms.

Now, if the movie comes out and turns out to be theologically reprehensible, then people might have something to complain about. However, I doubt that that’s going to be the case, given Gibson’s well-documented devout Catholic views. It remains to be seen whether it will be groundbreaking in any way aside from not flinching away from the abuse that Jesus took, but I don’t think that Gibson is suddenly going to turn blasphemer.

For a good look at what Jesus had to endure, take a look at this article from the Blue Letter Bible site, “Medical Aspects of the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ“. I used to have this article (or one very similar to it) on my computer, and it’s a fascinating document.

Lastly, one caveat about the trailer that I did notice, and bothers me a little bit if Gibson was going for accuracy in his portrayal of the crucifixion. Jesus is shown being nailed to the cross through his palms. While this is a very popular depiction, it’s very medically unsound. From the above linked article (emphasis mine):

The patibulum was put on the ground and the victim laid upon it. Nails, about 7 inches long and with a diameter of 1 cm (roughly 3/8 of an inch) were driven in the wrists. The points would go into the vicinity of the median nerve, causing shocks of pain to radiate through the arms. It was possible to place the nails between the bones so that no fractures (or broken bones) occurred. Studies have shown that nails were probably driven through the small bones of the wrist, since nails in the palms of the hand would not support the weight of a body. In ancient terminology, the wrist was considered to be part of the hand.

Ah, well. The movie’s due to be released next Easter, so we’re not likely to find out much more about how good it actually is until then. Aside from the one gaffe of the placement of the nails, though, it definitely looks interesting, and I’m looking forward to finding out more about it.