[perryp]

http://www.walb.com/Global/story.asp?S=1613018

Leaders of two Jewish groups are giving negative reviews after posing as pastors so they could attend an advance screening of Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ."
Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League and Rabbis James Rudin and David Elcott of the American Jewish Committee paid their way into the Global Pastors Network conference in Florida.

They sat unnoticed Wednesday evening among thousands of pastors, who had been addressed earlier in the day by Gibson himself.

Foxman and the rabbis told The Washington Times they registered for the conference under a fabricated church name and signed a non-disclosure agreement regarding contents of the film.

But afterwards, they called reporters to complain that the movie includes a verse from the Gospels that historically has been used to blame the Jewish people for killing Jesus. In Matthew 27:25, Jews calling for Jesus' crucifixion say, "His blood be on us and on our children."

[RooneyX]

Mel Gibson : I'm stinking rich and I'm going to use that money to spread hate, convert people to Christianity, spread religious literalism and even use the Pope, who I don't accept as Pope, to advertize my blood drenched movie.

Pope: I did not endorse this movie.

Mel Gibson: That's because you're not Catholic.

ADL: Hmmm, we really must look into the agenda here. Get me the movie...no matter what!

M: James, our client wants you to get hold of a very secretive piece of film.

James Bond: Yes, sir. I'd be happy to see Mel Gibson as a dying villain for once.

[Millennium]

I'm going to reserve judgment on this movie until I see it. It sounds interesting enough, though I do wish they had decided to leave it unsubbed (as was originally planned).

[Millennium]

I will say, however, that impersonating the clergy of a religion you don't even follow to get into a closed screening of a movie, and signing an NDA you have every intention of betraying, is not very nice. These two should be sued for breach of contract, as far as that goes.

[itai195]

Originally posted by Millennium:
I will say, however, that impersonating the clergy of a religion you don't even follow to get into a closed screening of a movie, and signing an NDA you have every intention of betraying, is not very nice. These two should be sued for breach of contract, as far as that goes.

According to the NY Times, Abe Foxman didn't sign the agreement. It also says that the agreement basically amounted to "You won't say anything about the film if you didn't like it, but you can hype it up as much as you want if you did like it."

I don't suppose it's worth mentioning that Gibson is actively excluding Jewish leaders from seeing the film. He's also lying to the public about having received the Pope's approval.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by itai195:
According to the NY Times, Abe Foxman didn't sign the agreement. It also says that the agreement basically amounted to "You won't say anything about the film if you didn't like it, but you can hype it up as much as you want if you did like it."

I don't suppose it's worth mentioning that Gibson is actively excluding Jewish leaders from seeing the film. He's also lying to the public about having received the Pope's approval.

Gibson himself isn't involved in any of the viewings. It's the distributor that's doing it.

Secondly, there are quite a few Jewish leaders who have seen it in various stages.

Third of all, he or his distributor didn't say anything about a papal endorsement, that was the media relaying from a "vatican insider".

Originally posted by Millennium:
I will say, however, that impersonating the clergy of a religion you don't even follow to get into a closed screening of a movie, and signing an NDA you have every intention of betraying, is not very nice. These two should be sued for breach of contract, as far as that goes.

There will never be a lawsuit, because they are going to accuse the distributor of picking them out of a crowd for legal action because they are Jewish. Sad, but that's just the truth. It's a license.



This movie just sounds like all the other controvercial movies to come out... all hype, and it ends up being absolutely nothing. "Jesus Christ Superstar"... even my grandmother thought it was no big deal, and there are not to many people more religious than her (think little old lady who goes to church every sunday, and if she can't go sunday, she goes on Saturday, just to make sure she doesn't miss a week).

There are always people upset over movies. Everyone wants fame and money... that's what this is truly all about.

People both Jewish, Christian (and none of the above) have seen later copies of it, and said the claims that it is anti-semetic are unfounded, and ficticious.


I'll reserve judgement to when I go see it.

Personally, it looks like a small group of people who just want to have something to complain about (like that's something new).


Nobody says anything about all those movies that make EVERY german, african, arab person look evil. And all those stories are just made up, no historical context to them at all.

Some people love to cry. Some even go as far as self mutalization just to get attention.... these people are just shy of that. It's just coincidence they are jewish. They are just people who do anything for some spotlight.

[quandarry]

well the jews did have jesus killed, good thing they did or a lot of the world be worshipping elephant testicles or some such thing.

[RooneyX]

Originally posted by quandarry:
well the jews did have jesus killed, good thing they did or a lot of the world be worshipping elephant testicles or some such thing.

Penis envy is no excuse to worship a man on a cross.

[itai195]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Gibson himself isn't involved in any of the viewings. It's the distributor that's doing it.

Yes, I'm sure his production studio is helpless in preventing the choices

People both Jewish, Christian (and none of the above) have seen later copies of it, and said the claims that it is anti-semetic are unfounded, and ficticious.

People who have objected to the film have objected to one scene specifically, and the movie's depictions of Jews in general. From what I've read, some versions of the movie have the scene and others don't. I'll reserve judgment until we see what the final form looks like.

[ghost_flash]

Is there a problem suddenly with portraying the truth?

Is it only ok to portray the truth if the following subjects are of focus?

- Slavery
- Holocaust
- WWII (Band of Brothers)

I'm happy it's pissing them off, it must be fairly accurate.

note: One of my favorite pieces, I saw while studying Art and Architecture in Italy.

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by RooneyX:
Mel Gibson : I'm stinking rich and I'm going to use that money to spread hate, convert people to Christianity, spread religious literalism and even use the Pope, who I don't accept as Pope, to advertize my blood drenched movie.

Pope: I did not endorse this movie.

Mel Gibson: That's because you're not Catholic.

ADL: Hmmm, we really must look into the agenda here. Get me the movie...no matter what!

M: James, our client wants you to get hold of a very secretive piece of film.

James Bond: Yes, sir. I'd be happy to see Mel Gibson as a dying villain for once.

How would this movie convert anyone to Catholicism? I really want to know, as I am Catholic already as is most of the USA compared to other religions.

Pope: Stood neutral, probably because of political reasons, but I'll bet your arse he loved the friggin thing.

Secretive? It was a screening, and he can invite whomever he wants! Hey Mr. Spielburg, next time you make a Holocaust movie, invite some friggin Catholic Priests ok?

James Bond: Yesh Shir, I'd be only too happy to shee Mell Gibshun as a dying villian for wunsh! Take that trebek!

Jeez.

[ThinkInsane]

This thread brings a couple of questions to mind.

1. Rooney, would you even care if this movie didn't offend your well stated anti-religious views? Were you as bothered by The Last Temptation of Christ, which was so controversial at the time among Christians?

2. Perry, would you have posted this if it was some other group that did this, and not Jews?
Disclaimer: No accusation here, I'm genuinely curious.

3. Why is this in the political forum instead of the lounge? Give me a reason quick, before I move it.

[macvillage.net]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
This thread brings a couple of questions to mind.

3. Why is this in the political forum instead of the lounge? Give me a reason quick, before I move it.

Because someone is going to declare all who posted here "antisemites", and that we are trying to drive Israel into the Sea by using hollywood.

Just wait a few minutes until one of the 3 come here to do it. They are debating right now on who gets to do it.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Because someone is going to declare all who posted here "antisemites", and that we are trying to drive Israel into the Sea by using hollywood.

Just wait a few minutes until one of the 3 come here to do it. They are debating right now on who gets to do it.

Not a compelling reason. I'll give it a little more time.

[itai195]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
Is there a problem suddenly with portraying the truth?

The scene in question is not endorsed by the Vatican as the 'truth.'

[vmarks]

Originally posted by macvillage.net:
Because someone is going to declare all who posted here "antisemites", and that we are trying to drive Israel into the Sea by using hollywood.

Just wait a few minutes until one of the 3 come here to do it. They are debating right now on who gets to do it.

No, no. You're clearly thinking of the thread where everyone declares they aren't an anti-semite because they've taken some test posted on someone's private website. Keep it straight.

[lil'babykitten]

So, is it time for another party?

[ghost_flash]

Originally posted by itai195:
The scene in question is not endorsed by the Vatican as the 'truth.'

Where did you get that from?

The pope said, "It is as it was", and that is good enough for me.

[itai195]

Originally posted by ghost_flash:
Where did you get that from?

The pope said, "It is as it was", and that is good enough for me.

You've heard of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council, I presume?

Look, I don't think Gibson is anti-Semitic and I don't think any Jewish leaders are saying he is either. To the contrary, I've read mostly praise for his artistic skill. The concern is with the inclusion of the scene in question and the effect it may have on the prevalence of anti-Semitism in general. I think a mass-market film about an important religious event has some responsibilities to uphold, don't you? This is different from making an inaccurate film about Shakespeare; people don't kill each other over interpretations of Hamlet (though Gibson's was a little wacky).

[quandarry]

Originally posted by ThinkInsane:
This thread brings a couple of questions to mind.

3. Why is this in the political forum instead of the lounge? Give me a reason quick, before I move it.

a/ if you move this to the lounge it will cause a war.

b/ this is the political/war lounge. isn't that where religion belongs? it is the reason for most wars.

c/

[DeathToWindows]

Originally posted by itai195:
[B people don't kill each other over interpretations of Hamlet (though Gibson's was a little wacky). [/B]

just had to watch that for AP english... spare me the Oedipal complex...

[itai195]

Originally posted by DeathToWindows:
just had to watch that for AP english... spare me the Oedipal complex...

Hope you got to see Kenneth Branagh's [superior] version as well.