Have I mentioned chocolate-covered coffee beans before? I think I have. Thus far in life, the material things that I have extreme partiality towards as clean-as-they-get wide rivers and bridges in old cities/or modern ones and chocolate-covered coffee beans. Getting to know what I truly like is a lot of fun!

And in effort to self-handicap myself (ref: social psychology, Myers chapter 1-4), although I have 4 papers and 3 journal entries, six chapters of reading and a review sheet to complete before 4 pm Friday, I will blog.

Sze influenced me to blog about this question: How accurate it the "Passion of Christ" by Mel Gibson? But another question that I think we also should ask before the prior question can be answered is, why do we care about its accuracy? So what is it is? So what if it isn't? Would be respond and deal with it and benefit from it and greaten our lives because of the answer (either way)? There's a lot of hype going on because of the making of this movie. On one hand, I would say go see it and then yak about it, don't preconceive opinions or notions beforehand because preconception (in this case, added preconception to what we already think about our world) is faulty. Social psychologists can tell you that.
Point two: what is the movie to oneself? Just another movie? Further proof of the craziness of Christianity? Further proof of the authenticity of Christianity? A medium for dialogue? An evangelism tool? How we view the movie moves us to which pari of lenses we put on to interpret the movie. And I do think that there is a better method than others in discussing this movie. Bear in mind that the movie is Mel Gibson's interpretation of Christ's final hours on Earth. I think the dangerous part of this movie, in terms of its value and accuracy, is the balance between its artistry and authenticity, being a film based on true, historical events (well, depending on who you are, I take this stance). If one does not take Christ as a person that did live some thousand years ago, and lived and died as recorded in the Bible, being the most revealing and informative source we have today, then I think the topic of discussion would be entirely different.
But leaving it at that, how is accuracy to be defined? What makes something accurate? Say, those wax models of famous people--intended to be as perfect as perfect can be. Replication. If that is what one would take accuracy to be, then no, the movie was inaccurate. And yes, there is a huge difference between wax models and films, but there you go for analogies. I think that the artistic efforts of the director did get in the way of the historic accuracy in some scenes and in others, no. But I would say that Gibson leaned towards being more historically accurate than artisitic, while expressing his intepretion clearly in the movie. The dialogue was definately not verbatim from the Bible (as some other Jesus movies are), but the same ideas were expressed. There was 'little' dialogue which makes me think that every sentence, every action for that matter was deliberate, purposeful, not wasted. Gibson's Catholic influence can be seen--the focus on suffering, the emphasis on the symbolic nature of blood, Mary as the Mother figure.
Gibson did say that his intent of this movie was to shock his audience, especially with the flogging scene. Some cirtics say that it is not accurate as no one could have survived such intense punishment and Jesus would have died several times over in that scene. But then you ask again, is it its artistic value or reality-based accuracy? But I do say that Mel got his message across very clearly. It is a very bloody snece yet also a scene that I think Christians should watch to remember the meaning of death is, and a specific death at that, Christ's death. The forgetting of what it took to die, how one dies, anethesizes the depth and reality of Jesus' sacrifice. Sure, Jesus dies on the cross for our sins, but do your really know what that took? Do you really know what that means? For Christians, I see this movie more as a reminder, a timely and necessary reminder of who their Savior is and what He did for them to enable salvation and a life with God. For non-Christians I see this movie as medium to spark dialogue. In order to understand the movie, the flashbacks and the scenes, much explaination is needed. Much in the movie was infered and gained from needed outside knowledge--without which, connections between the scenes would be difficult to make. This movie is a dangerous movie that can tip to one side as easily as it could to another. Yet, I think this is a risk worth taking. Ignorance is not bliss.