The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

Mel Gibson on Leno


#1

Jay asked him something about the violence



and mel says: "if you think this movie is violent i gotta say is look at Kill Bill, you know? why are they picking on me?"



or something like that





sounded like a slam when i heard it


#2

Kill Bill’s violence is cartoon and comic, The Passion is intended to be shocking, brutal, and realistic. Not a very good in-depth comparison by Gibson there.


#3

[quote]Kill Bill’s violence is cartoon and comic, The Passion is intended to be shocking, brutal, and realistic. Not a very good in-depth comparison by Gibson there.[/quote]



That´s so right.If he really compared the violence of Passion and KB, it would stupid.. (I only saw the Trailer of Passion, cuz I hace to wait to April to see Passion here)

#4

PLus, Kill Bill is supposed to be violent. So is the passion, but not in the same way.


#5

Yeah, I don’t think we see fountains of blood spurting out from Jesus in the Passion.


#6

The violence in Kill Bill is more for entertainment value and gives you an adrenaline rush, while the violence in The Passionis cruel and brutal and tears at your heart. There, end of discussion.


#7

Doesn’t sound like a slam. Kill Bill is supposed to be bloody, and thats what Mel is calling it.


#8

i can’t see how a comparison can be done, really, kill bill was completely made up and written by QT, the passion of christ is not exactly an original subject, and it could be threated and shot in a thousand different ways…

besides, even though i don’t consider the word “violent” to be necessarily negative, i think it’s not too correct to answer this way, if you don’t think your movie is violent, just say so, without having to point your finger at someone else…


#9

[quote] if you don’t think your movie is violent, just say so, without having to point your finger at someone else…[/quote]
Citing reference is how many a court cases have been won, cholo.


#10

I agree with Reptile. Kill Bill was something that came out of the mind of QT. It is a tribute to violent martial arts films. The amount of blood borders on the comical. The scene in the House of Blue Leaves, by having it turn to black and white, makes it artistic and you see more of the choreography instead of all the buckets of blood that was used.



Mel Gibson’s movie supposedly is more historically correct. Did Mel Gibson go back in time to witness the events? I do not think so. The Gospels were written 200 years after Christ had been killed. The stories may have been passed down from generation to generation, but they can be muddied and translation can be lost. I am certain that whatever Jesus went through had to have been very bloody and brutal. But please, let’s leave some of it up to the imagination. I don’ need to see it to feel it. Just the sound of the man’s groans would have been enough. I don’t go to see a movie to be grossed out puking on the floor, or pass out from fainting. All ready they are blaming one woman’s death from a heart attack on the Passion. I go to be entertained. If I want realism, brutality, and gore, I can go to the nearest ER and see gunshot patients being wheeled in from a gang war. The Passion, there’s nothing passionate about it. It’s just there to shock people.



I would not go see such gore and violence, but QT with Kill Bill has it more of an art form, and you know the reason for it. It is pure exploitation. Mel Gibson is telling an old story, one that has been told before countless times and with far more powerful results. If I want to see a movie about Jesus’ life, I will see “The Greatest Story Ever Told.” That two part movie is a classic.



(@



AJCrane


#11

Mel Gibson wants the audience to be able to see how Jesus was brutally tortured and beaten. The Passion isn’t one of those cookie-clean Biblical movies from the 50’s where you see Edward G. Robinson writing the 10 Commandments. The Passion is a brutal and sadistic film, made to show the horrors that Christ went through. And I’m sure back then, people just didn’t hear his groans, they actually saw what happened. Kill Bill is pure entertainment, and the violence is excessive, but it is mostly comical. The Passion of the Christ does not glorify violence, but tries to paint an accurate portrayal of what really happened. If you want a G-rated version of Christ’s life, go rent King of Kings.


#12

I do not have to see it to know that it is there, just as Hitchock used suspense in Psycho. You saw the blood going down the drain, but you did not see every knife stroke that went into the woman’s body. You did not have to. Your imagination filled in the rest. You knew without seeing that she was being knifed to death over and over. “The Greatest Story Ever Told” was more brutul than the King of Kings, but you did not have to see every whip stroke cutting the man’s flesh to know that was taking place. You still felt it just the same.



(@



AJCrane


#13

Mel Gibson wanted the audience to go through an emotional rollercoaster in the movie, just like those who actually witnessed the death of Christ must have gone through. I don’t know about you, but this is one of the most intense and heart-felt movies that I have ever seen. The director’s intention wasn’t to make you sympathize with Christ or to hate the Roman Guards who tortured him, but to let you make up your own mind by showing what happened. This is a very brutal movie, and it is intended to be that.


#14

[quote]Yeah, I don’t think we see fountains of blood spurting out from Jesus in the Passion.[/quote]

I don’t know what version of the Passion YOU saw, but he was bleeding plenty when they beat him with the barbed wire things.


#15

I saw a little blood spurt out when they put the nail in his wrist.


#16

Speaking of which, I thought they nailed him in the wrist. If they got him right in the hand then it would have ripped the muscles and he would have fallen, or so I’m told.


#17

I really don’t mean to make this a The Passion of The Christ thread, but I need to correct you guys on a few things.


  1. The Passion does not mean the English ‘passion.’ It is Latin for ‘to suffer’.


  2. The Passion was not created to ‘entertain.’ It was meant as an historical telling and an art form. It was meant to show the sacrifice that Jesus went through, and to show you what that sacrifice meant.


  3. You cannot just ‘cut away’ like in Psycho (and I hate it when people compare The Passion with movies like that). The whole point of seeing the brutality is to MAKE you feel bad. Also, as Christian belief goes, everyone is actually responsible for the suffering/death of Christ. Therefore, in a way, the movie is supposed to make you feel guilty (at least, that is how I felt). The Passion is meant to be at the least an emotionally draining experience, and at the most, change people’s lives… Kill Bill is not meant for this.



    Anyway, I didn’t mean to make an arguement out of this, but some comments like ‘I didn’t need to see that’ is entirely why Mel Gibson made the movie the way he did… because, in a way, you DID need to see it.

#18

In the movie, they tied his wrists to the cross with rope. So even if the muscles in his hands ripped, he would still be there.


#19

[quote]I really don’t mean to make this a The Passion of The Christ thread, but I need to correct you guys on a few things.


  1.  The Passion does not mean the English ‘passion.’  It is Latin for ‘to suffer’.


  2.  The Passion was not created to ‘entertain.’  It was meant as an historical telling and an art form.  It was meant to show the sacrifice that Jesus went through, and to show you what that sacrifice meant.


  3.  You cannot just ‘cut away’ like in Psycho (and I hate it when people compare The Passion with movies like that).  The whole point of seeing the brutality is to MAKE you feel bad.  Also, as Christian belief goes, everyone is actually responsible for the suffering/death of Christ.  Therefore, in a way, the movie is supposed to make you feel guilty (at least, that is how I felt).  The Passion is meant to be at the least an emotionally draining experience, and at the most, change people’s lives… Kill Bill is not meant for this.



    Anyway, I didn’t mean to make an arguement out of this, but some comments like ‘I didn’t need to see that’ is entirely why Mel Gibson made the movie the way he did… because, in a way, you DID need to see it.[/quote]

1: I did know that, I’m not sure about anyone else.



2: Not entirely true. While the Passion is a unique film, it is still a film. It entertains, just in a more ngative way than we are used to.



3: I agree with you there. But guilt is not the end. We’re supposed to feel blessed that our lord would do that for us, and he forave us for it.


#20

Fair enough, Transluscent. Fair enough. At least you didn’t stone me, like I figure some might. :wink: