Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Million Dollar TTRPG Crowdfunders
Most Anticipated Tabletop RPGs Of The Year
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
The Passion of the Christ
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Kahuna Burger" data-source="post: 1479553" data-attributes="member: 8439"><p>1) 'trashing' is way too loaded a term and dismisses the criticisms people make. Especially sicne the majority of comments have been about why people personally would not see or did not enjoy the film.</p><p></p><p>2) This is a argument I've never understood for two reasons. The first is the strange implication that I can't make a decision about whether I want to see a film without seeing the film. this is the purpose of advertising - to make up my mind for me. And if everything slanted to make me want to watch the film does the opposite, I think I have a very good basis for saying that I don't want to see the film and why. The second related point about criticism implies that I have to have seen something played out in the film before I have an opinion of it. The isn't the Crying Game here, there was no surprise ending, nothing the reviewers, the previews or the hundreds of (convient for publicity) 'news' peices didn't lay out for us. I know what the story is about, I know what it isn't about. I know what level of "reaslism" was used, how the various characters from the source text were portrayed, what the 'message' is. More importantly, I've recieved the same information on these facets from those supporting the film as I have from those criticising it. So if I want to weigh in on the artistic or social value of a ten minute close up/slow mo of a sourging, all I have to do it check the timing and focus from two different sources who are commenting on directly seeing the film, and I'm gonna comment on it. Just like if I tell you that the movie KIDS contained an extended scene of an unconsious girl's rape with no followup or shown consequences for the rapist except that he got what he wanted, you can comment on that and what it says about the film to your heart's content and I won't say "hey, you didn't watch the film, don't trash it!"</p><p></p><p>I'm not gonna say "the constumes were really dumb" or "the music detracted" because those are judgements based on the actual expeirincing of the film. But when there is no one denying that the very point of the film is to show an extended scene of torture and death, I'm gonna comment on that kind of film making, and in another forum I'll happily comment on how I respond to the religious aspects of the film and how it is received. </p><p></p><p>sorry for the long digression, but the idea that you can't criticise uncontested facts about a movie without seeing the movie has always rubbed me the wrong way. Unless those critisicms include a factual inaccuracy that you can correct from seeing the film, let it ride is my view.</p><p></p><p>Kahuna Burger</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Kahuna Burger, post: 1479553, member: 8439"] 1) 'trashing' is way too loaded a term and dismisses the criticisms people make. Especially sicne the majority of comments have been about why people personally would not see or did not enjoy the film. 2) This is a argument I've never understood for two reasons. The first is the strange implication that I can't make a decision about whether I want to see a film without seeing the film. this is the purpose of advertising - to make up my mind for me. And if everything slanted to make me want to watch the film does the opposite, I think I have a very good basis for saying that I don't want to see the film and why. The second related point about criticism implies that I have to have seen something played out in the film before I have an opinion of it. The isn't the Crying Game here, there was no surprise ending, nothing the reviewers, the previews or the hundreds of (convient for publicity) 'news' peices didn't lay out for us. I know what the story is about, I know what it isn't about. I know what level of "reaslism" was used, how the various characters from the source text were portrayed, what the 'message' is. More importantly, I've recieved the same information on these facets from those supporting the film as I have from those criticising it. So if I want to weigh in on the artistic or social value of a ten minute close up/slow mo of a sourging, all I have to do it check the timing and focus from two different sources who are commenting on directly seeing the film, and I'm gonna comment on it. Just like if I tell you that the movie KIDS contained an extended scene of an unconsious girl's rape with no followup or shown consequences for the rapist except that he got what he wanted, you can comment on that and what it says about the film to your heart's content and I won't say "hey, you didn't watch the film, don't trash it!" I'm not gonna say "the constumes were really dumb" or "the music detracted" because those are judgements based on the actual expeirincing of the film. But when there is no one denying that the very point of the film is to show an extended scene of torture and death, I'm gonna comment on that kind of film making, and in another forum I'll happily comment on how I respond to the religious aspects of the film and how it is received. sorry for the long digression, but the idea that you can't criticise uncontested facts about a movie without seeing the movie has always rubbed me the wrong way. Unless those critisicms include a factual inaccuracy that you can correct from seeing the film, let it ride is my view. Kahuna Burger [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
The Passion of the Christ
Top