http://blogcritics.org/ A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously. en Copyright 2005 by the authors Thu, 5 Feb 2004 23:25:31 EST http://backend.userland.com/rss Blogcritics.org custom software http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/02/04/090928.php#comment-42138 Superman, I...uh... just... don't know what to say.... After a few days spent on Blogcritics, I've learned that if you have to explain satire... ah... nevermind. 42138@blogcritics.org Thu, 5 Feb 2004 23:25:31 EST http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/02/04/090928.php#comment-42128 Umm, you seem to have strong opinions about this movie. What exactly makes you say the Bible is historically inaccurate? I've heard that, and I'm wondering what proof you have. If you don't believe in Christianity and don't want to watch some movie about a guy named Jesus, then you don't have to. Really. Oh yeah, for the violence in this movie, my personal opinion is that there's a difference between gratuitous violence and non-gratuitous violence. Both are equally disturbing, but like in "Saving Private Ryan" there's some non-gratuitous but still very violent violence. Really. A lot of Christians don't know what they are talking about, so take what I say (as one of them) with a grain of salt. Who knows, I might be right. But I might be wrong. By the way, there's nothing wrong with making a movie based on a book, even if that book is fiction (as you claim the Bible is). Wouldn't that be Lord of the Ringsish? Well, a little different, because the Bible is religious and whatever, but if it's not true there's nothing wrong with a good, well-thought out story. Even if the Bible's not true the story must be decent if people have kept it around ~2000 years even when all the philosophers said "God is dead." 42128@blogcritics.org Thu, 5 Feb 2004 22:42:46 EST