New Movie about Jesus Christ coming out....r@pe, exorcisms, and a radical prophet!
|3 years ago||class of '07 - away - #1|
EXCLUSIVE: As Darren Aronofsky’s Noah gets ready to set sail and iconic directors Ridley Scott and Steven Spielberg forge ahead with epics about Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt, faithful Biblical epics are flourishing in Hollywood. It looks like there is even room for one that takes the most controversial look at the life of Jesus Christ since Martin Scorsese’s The Last Temptation of Christ.
I’m told that Muse Productions’ Chris Hanley, whose credits include American Psycho, has stepped up to finance development of a film about Christ. It will be based on Jesus of Nazareth, a book that director Paul Verhoeven co-wrote after immersing himself in the history and researching the subject for nearly two decades. Verhoeven plans to direct the film, which will be written by Roger Avary. Avary shared the Academy Award for Best Original Script with Quentin Tarantino for Pulp Fiction.
Verhoeven’s take on the life of Jesus Christ discounts all of the miracles that inform the New Testament. That includes the immaculate conception, and the resurrection. Verhoeven doesn’t believe any of them happened. I wrote about Verhoeven’s ambitions in spring, 2011 as he and his reps at ICM first tried to find funding, no small feat given some of the theories he put forth in the book. The most controversial: that Jesus might have been the product of his mother being r*ped by a Roman soldier, which Verhoeven said was commonplace at the time, and that Jesus was a radical prophet who performed exorcisms and was convinced he would find the kingdom of Heaven on earth, and did not know he would be sentenced to die on the cross by Pontius Pilate. That, and the discounting of the miracles that pepper the New Testament, has made this a daunting project to set up. But while Verhoeven’s film credits include Showgirls (as well as hits like Robocop, Total Recall and Basic Instinct) he isn’t trying to tantalize here. He is fixated on Christ not for the miracles depicted in the blockbuster film The Passion Of The Christ, but rather in the enduring power of the message Christ preached which have kept him first and foremost in the minds of Christians for 2000 years. Verhoeven feels too many take Jesus’ sacrifice for our sins as a free pass to misbehave, because they think they don’t have to take responsibility for their actions. He feels that the value of Christ’s journey is the opportunity to emulate his life and the values he held dear, like forgiveness.
“If you look at the man, it’s clear you have a person who was completely innovative in the field of ethics,” Verhoeven told me last year. “My own passion for Jesus came when I started to realize that. It’s not about miracles, it’s about a new set of ethics, an openness towards the world, which was anathema in a Roman-dominated world. I believe he was crucified because they felt that politically, he was a dangerous person whose following was getting bigger and bigger. Jesus’ ideals are about the utopia of human behavior, about how we should treat each other, how we should step into the shoes of our enemy.”
Elsewhere on the movie Bible belt, Prometheus director Scott and his Scott Free have become attached to Exodus, a project that had already been set at Fox with Chernin Entertainment. It’s from a script by Adam Cooper and Bill Collage, the Trump Heist scribes who reinvented themselves with this project and a version of Moby d!ck that Timur Bekmambetov has been developing.
That puts Fox and Warner Bros in competition on Moses movies, as Steven Spielberg continues to circle Gods And Kings, the Stuart Hazeldine and Michael Green-scripted epic. Now, both directors have more films than they know what to do with, but I’m told this has become a real race. Scott is prepping his next film The Counselor, the Cormac McCarthy scripted drama with Michael Fassbender, Javier Bardem, Brad Pitt, Cameron Diaz and Penelope Cruz for Fox, while Spielberg, who is in post production on Lincoln, is readying Robopocalypse at DreamWorks as his next film. There seems a great opportunity to update The Ten Commandments, but I doubt there is room for more than one.
The other major ancient religious-themed project, the film about Judah Macabee that Mel Gibson set at Warner Bros with the intention of directing a Braveheart-style film about the events that are commemorated at Hanukkah, seems to have imploded because of discord between Gibson and the screenwriter he hired, Joe Eszterhas. They had a falling out, one I’ve heard stemmed from Eszterhas showing up without having put in the work to transfer Gibson’s ideas for the movie to the page. Eszterhas, in turn, taped Gibson getting angry and yelling at him, and the formerly highly paid scribe has turned the controversy into what seems like a plea for attention, even publishing an e-book about his experiences with Gibson. But if Gibson said even a portion of the things Eszterhas claims he said about Jews, Gibson should find another subject for his next directing a.ssignment because he is missing a sensitivity chip, along with more than a few marbles.
Verhoeven doesn’t have that kind of baggage coming into the Jesus Christ project, but he is treading on territory that Christians universally would label as blasphemous. The film seems to have landed in the appropriate place, as a gritty and controversial independent film. Both Verhoeven and Avary are repped by ICM Partners, which did not comment, nor did Hanley return my call.
Paul Verhoeven Finds Backing And A Writer For Controversial Jesus Christ Movie - Yahoo! Movies
The world is crayyy I tells ya....crayyyy
|Props given to GrezyNclean||hot topic (06-21-2012)|
|3 years ago||class of '10 - away - #4|
|3 years ago||class of '11 - away - #15|
Directed by Larry Charles
at Angelika and Lincoln Sq. Cinemas
Running Time: 101 min.
has become the religion of Left media. The new mockumentary Religulous
proves this by
offering the polarizing gospel according to Bill Maher, TV’s atheist comedian
and political “argufier.” Maher is not a satirist; he’s too biased to search
out and clarify society’s absurdity. He likes preaching to his choir, such as
the in-studio audience of his HBO series Real Time, who applaud like performing seals
to his every partisan snipe. Religulous is a weird movie to watch because
the lack of a laugh track leaves Maher’s hostility exposed. To scoff at the
foundations of charity, justice and love that hold people together, that’s
movie doesn’t seriously explore how religion affects politics; it’s just a
snide attack on religious belief. Its style (Maher blames religion as the cause
of all wars) is what used to be dismissed as barroom discourse. But Maher
doesn’t provoke a f!ght; he avoids anyone who could seriously challenge his
disdain—resorting instead to amusement park employees, an anti-Christian kook
standing outside the Vatican, a couple religious hucksters and silly-looking
clips from Hollywood biblical epics.
one of those comedians whose bitterness was unleashed by the 2000 Presidential
election. He offers insult as argument. Religulous puts Red State citizens on the spot
to explain their beliefs. Since they’re not articulate—because they’re not
practiced stand-up comics—Maher makes them look stupid rather than devout.
(Subtitles undercut the interviews, conveying snark Maher wasn’t honest enough
to say to his subjects’ faces.) This is the same unfair tactic of Borat;
and, sure enough, Religulous
is also directed by
Larry Charles, a TV hack who has latched onto current political confusion,
exploiting the nation’s divided ideals. This is a horrible example of the
Left’s certainty of its own superiority. Maher says, “I’m here promoting doubt.
That’s my sermon” to a little roadside trucker’s chapel, yet thoroughly
disrespecting their space and their beliefs.
After Borat, Charles likes to put a camera crew
on screen, but this is not full disclosure; Religulous is as rigged as a Saturday
Night Live routine.
The documentary hoax is Charles and Maher’s own bunkum. Sneering takes the
place of allowing an anthropologist to define the historic need for mythology
and faith. Claiming pseudo-science, Maher tries to debunk speaking in tongues
by interviewing Andrew Newberg, a neuro-theologist—but if that title’s not
hokum, we’re all dupes.
intellectually slovenly to demean religion based on what goes wrong in secular
society. Maher’s one-sided view never looks deep enough to respect other
people’s views. Bresson’s Diary of a Country Priest hit greatness in its mysteriously
ambivalent repentance scene. And Christopher Durang’s classic play, Sister
Mary Ignatius Explains It All For You,
conveyed the anguish of a lifetime spent in moral contemplation. Neither art,
nor philosophy, Religulous highlights Maher’s sourpuss for
nearly two hours of flimsy barroom rhetoric. “Religion must die for man to
live,” he summarizes. Bill Maher
became a theology expert around the time Jon Stewart became a political
analyst; it’s a hoodwink akin to the moment the Reagan administration
registered ketchup as a vegetable in public school cafeterias.
anti-religious people need to a.ssert themselves,” Maher pleads. But the problem
is that this a.ssertion is hostile. “I’m just asking questions,” Maher nudges to
us while lying to the people he humiliates (a priest, various ministers,
assorted laymen believers). He bests Michael Moore by giving security guards,
public relations folk, even Muslim extremists virtually no screen time that
might redound upon his deliberate ambush tactics. Yet it all stems from the
same querulous arrogance. Maher and Charles aren’t merely irresponsible; they
intend culture war. They’re not wits; they’re culture-war mongers.
|3 years ago||class of '05 - away - #19|
The same story beats.
The same aesthetic...
The same everything, really.
I don't necessarily think it sounds all that "dark" or "edgy"... It just seems like a newer approach to the same story... In this case, focusing on the ethics & teachings of Christ rather than the stuff everyone talks about...
"He turned water into wine"
"The fishes and the loaves"
As a Christian (with agnostic tendencies), I think it'll be interesting to see a different kind of story told with the same tools.
|3 years ago||class of '11 - away - #20|
I get that. But coming from Aronofsky i already know this won't be genuine.
How this guy manage to get the budget over Scorsese's Silence?